On May 21, 2007, at 12:09 AM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:
n 5/20/07, Jason Dillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I really don't see how using this helps with anything... 'cept maybe
reduce the number of artifacts in the repo, and maybe remove the need
for that ${version} properly... at the expense of users not being
able to use past snapshot artifacts when newer snaps break their
project.
I meant (but never tried it myself, but I guess I should) that
declaring dependency with an exact number not SNAPSHOT would work as
if the SNAPSHOT were released. Might it work?
Yes, this will trick Maven's release muck and snapshot updating logic
into thinking that those SNAPSHOT artifacts are not really
SNAPSHOTs... but in reality they still are. I've sent lots of mail
on this to the G list specifically about using these types of pinned
SNAPSHOT artifacts and how that is very harmful.
The crux of the problem is that these *are still SNAPSHOT artifacts*
and they still live in SNAPSHOT repositories, which most have a lax
policy about keeping those artifacts around or changing them.
Compaired to non-SNAPSHOT repositories, which are (in theory)
supposed to contain artifacts that never change and are never
removed. Of course we all know that is crazy to rely on, since its
just a filesystem, with no real checks or balances to ensure that
policy is enforced, but that is how they are supposed to work.
I can go on and on if you need more clarification for why its bad to
use pinned snapshots, except in very rare cases (and maybe not even
then its really a good choice). I certainly do *not* recommend using
them unless you really, really, really need to.
Um... and really, if that was what you were talking about I certainly
did not get that from the content of your mail :-P
* * *
Maven is good and Maven is bad... sometimes you love it, sometimes
you hate it... or at least that is how it is for me. I keep thinking
about rewriting something like Maven with out all of its horrible
wrinkles, but really I'd just end up making another beast that sucked
in other ways ;-)
The idea you are floating here to "get around" problems with Maven is
really going to just cause you more and more problems. Its Maven's
way or the highway in this case... if you try to hack around problems
like this you are going to end up with build roadkill for dinner (not
really my favorite choice for dinner).
The way to fix this is to... get dependency projects to publish
SNAPSHOTs to keep up with code changes, or limit your dependence on
SNAPSHOT artifacts. The latter is obviously preferred and easier,
though not always possible... which is almost certainly the case with
the relationship between the Geronimo and OpenEJB projects.
* * *
OpenEJB is a wee little project (er, from size of modules, not from
purpose and functionality) so I would not expect you to have too much
problems using Maven. What exactly are the issues you are seeing?
--jason
