> -----Original Message----- > From: Manfred Moser > Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2011 23:38 > To: dev@maven.apache.org > Subject: Re: Request for review and comment > http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-5167 > > On 11-09-17 09:00 AM, Jason Pyeron wrote: > > > > Is the metadata in the revision? Only export the revision. Defense, > > Healthcare, life safety, large organizations, all of these type of > > organizations have rules, we are trying to make Maven more > adaptable > > so it can be used there on projectes where the rules are enforced. > > > >> gap you list that repository in a<repository/> by pathname. > > Then you have a forbiden delta from what is in the official record. > > > >> Or you maintain a repo manager on the secure side of the air > > The repo manager was not in the official record. > > > >> gap and you publish it there. > >> > This whole argument is totally a red herring. You will not be > able to have all artifacts in the SCM system. At least you > have to specify the tool chain to actually run the build > including operating system, java and so on.
And they are in the SCM too ... Look I am not going to argue about what organizations should or should not do, nor do or will I care about arguments on how it should be changed. I am here providing a patch, and asking for technical evaluation on it. There is one simple fact here, and it is there are maven users who require this patch. There is two possible outcomes: it gets included in some form or it does not. If there are technical issues with the patch I will address them. I will no longer argue "political" issues, I will call them out as nonsense. > It is totally feasible to add a repo manager as just another > required build tool and add a backup/export of the repository > content as part of the code that you put on the dvd. You > could even just do a clean build on a fresh machine and take > a copy of the local repo. Or even create a virtual machine > image with the full setup. > > It will work just fine off the grid. In fact with Maven it > will run better if you use a repo manager than without.. > > I have done that in the past for escrow services in the > healthcare industry fullfilling all requirements and passing > various audits for ISO and FDA approval. > > The requirement you cite as part CMMI L3 and such does imho > not really exist in this strict sense of pure SCM storage. > You have to be able to do a reproducible build without > anything beyond what you supply for escrow .. but that has > nothing to do with SCM. And if you controlling the content of > your repository for build reproducability is one of the > dedicated enterprise features of e.g. Nexus Pro (and others > like Artifactory). > > Cludging something into Maven itself feels wrong to me. What part of the patch is cludgy, I would like to fix it. > > manfred > http://simpligility.com > > PS: also look at e.g. the Debian project and their > integration with Maven. It all build complete offline since > this is part of their requirement for bootstirapping so this > kind of behaviour is already possible. -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- - - - Jason Pyeron PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us - - Principal Consultant 10 West 24th Street #100 - - +1 (443) 269-1555 x333 Baltimore, Maryland 21218 - - - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
