On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Albert Kurucz <[email protected]> wrote: > Brian, > >> Ok then, I assert they are all fine. Now you can provide a list and >> refute me ;-). > In this case (if they were all fine) here is your list: > http://repo2.maven.org/maven2/.index/ > (But unfortunately they are not all fine.) > >> Seriously, the definition of "broken" depends on the observer. > True. This is why maybe there should be different "Good lists" and > users should be allowed to choose, depending on their taste. > >> Before we can >> "fix" anything "broken" we need to start by defining what you think is >> broken and why. > > One of the possible Definitions of "Good list", which I would like > call "Maven Central Compliance" is defined here: > http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-central-repository-upload.html > If artifacts are on Central which are not on this list (which list > should really be realized soon), I don't mind, as long as I could > search or filter by this list. > You cannot objectively define what is "broken" only if you specify > which Lists you are talking about. Do you mean, the "Maven Central > Compliance" list?
I assume you mean this list of requirements? There are some requirements for the minimal information in the POMs that are in the central repository. At least these must be present: modelVersion groupId artifactId packaging name version description url licenses scm url dependencies I don't think that I would consider things broken simply because the name, description, url, scm url where missing. I would be annoyed but not surprised if the license wasn't populated correctly. So if you're saying you want to exclude everything from your build simply because one of those are missing, then I think we fundamentally disagree. Yes it would be nice if those were filled in properly but none of those reduce the usefulness of users to a point where they simply should be treated like they don't exist. I consider things broken if the pom doesn't parse, the dependencies are wrong (again subject to perspective in some cases), the gav isn't correct, the checksums or signatures are broken. Otherwise from a repository perspective they are not broken. If you attempt to enumerate all the things in central that match all of those values above and build a repo of only those, it will be a nearly useless repo. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
