2009/12/3 Dan Tran <[email protected]>: > how ever, I am not keen with codehaus-parent name since it is should > be one lever up rather than maintained by MOJO > > how about > > plugin-parent > pom.xml > mojo-parent > pom.xml
I am not keep on plugin-parent as a name. we'll have to keep fighting people that think that plugins hosted on mojo should inherit from plugin-parent rather than mojo-parent. Additionally, if you have a distribution management in plugin-parent that will ultimately result in plugin-parent being pushed to repo1, I would be -1 unless it has the noRepositories enforcer rule. If it is an example of best practice and it is ending up on repo1, it should enforce the best practices of repo1, i.e. it should help people comply with the rule for repo1 ( http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-central-repository-upload.html) - I have other repositories or pluginRepositories listed in my POM, is that a problem? Yes, the central repository must be self contained, which means that all your dependencies must already be in the central repository. You need to remove the repositories and pluginRepositories entries and make sure your project still builds when your local repository cache is empty. The only exception allowed is when a dependency can not be distributed from the central repository due to the license. In that case only the POM for that dependency is required, listing where the dependency can be downloaded from. See an example<http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/javax/activation/activation/1.0.2/activation-1.0.2.pom> . I agree that until now enforcement of this rule has been somewhat lax... largely because we have not had the tools to enforce the rule... we have the tools now, so we should use those tools... we cannot just say "well we were fine until now, let's just continue" as that just means that there are more invalid artifacts in repo1. If you want to campaign for the rules of repo1 to be made more lax and have the above rule removed, by all means do so, but unless/until the rules of repo1 are changed, if it is ending up on repo1 and we have control over it, we should have the noRepositories enforcer rule. I agree that the noRepositories rule can be a pain... you need only look at the pain I have had with vcc.dev.java.net trying to get something that can be pushed to repo1 and is self-contained and dealing with the absolute mess that is java.net's maven repositories... -Stephen > > both is under org.codehaus.mojo groupId > > > -Dan > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 6:36 PM, Dan Tran <[email protected]> wrote: >> this is messy, but here it goes >> >> codehaus-parent >> pom.xml >> mojo-parent >> pom.xml >> >> both are released the same time. codehaus-parent has most of every >> thing, mojo-parent, has mojo's specific like site, scm, etc >> + noRepository rule >> >> any one can use codehaus-parent at their own risk, but I am very >> confident codehaus-parent will work well since it is tested >> by many of its mojo-parent's sub projects >> >> thoughts? >> >> -Dan >> >> >> On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 5:18 PM, Lee Thompson <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Dan wrote: >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> I think a "codehaus-parent" would be a good idea. >>>>> >>>>> But remember that the "codehaus-parent" would have to enforce the >>>>> noRepositories rule too (or else codehaus would have to stop pushing >>>>> repository.codehaus.org to repo1.maven.org >>>> >>>> the enforcement of noRepositories is how the debate started. and >>>> there fore no point for seperation >>> >>> To Dan's point, "plugin-parent" would essentially be "codehaus-parent" >>> without the addition of the noRepositories rule. >>> >>> Stephen wrote: >>>> But remember that the "codehaus-parent" would have to enforce the >>>> noRepositories rule too (or else codehaus would have to stop pushing >>>> repository.codehaus.org to repo1.maven.org >>> >>> Isn't this the mojo community supporting the maven community and an example >>> of supporting a wider audience than just the mojo community? >>> >>> What would be the negative effect of discontinuing the push to >>> repo1.maven.org? >>> >>> Thanks for your thoughts in advance. >>> >>> Lee >>> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > >
