It turns out that the URLs are slightly different. In our 1.3.5 instance with tomcat the URLs look like this:
http://server:port/archiva/repository/internal/... But in the 2.0.1 instance with jetty it looks like this (no ³archiva² string): http://server:port/repository/internal/Š I don¹t know if the string ³archiva² is an inherent difference between 1.3.5 and 2.0.1, or if it¹s a difference between our tomcat setup and our jetty setup. I browsed the 2.0.1 config files a bit but didn¹t see where this might be defined. Once we changed our maven settings.xml to remove ³archiva² from the URL, the 405 error went away. It was replaced with a 401, but hopefully now that is something we can work through. On 5/29/14, 11:34 AM, "Pimentel, Robert" <[email protected]> wrote: >Is it using the appropriate URL value? Can you provide the error stack >from maven (mvn -e)? Can you provide a snippet from the Archiva log(s)? > >Thanks, >Rob > >-----Original Message----- >From: Stallard,David [mailto:[email protected]] >Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 10:24 AM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: 405 error when uploading to Archiva 2.0.1 > >Just to add to the below, uploads are working fine through the web >interface but we get the http 405 error when a maven build tries to >upload. Downloads are working fine as well. > >Thanks, >David > >From: <Stallard>, "Stallard,David" ><[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> >Date: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 at 2:03 PM >To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" ><[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> >Subject: 405 error when uploading to Archiva 2.0.1 > >We are trying to test a maven deploy against our test instance of Archiva >2.0.1, but we are getting http 405 when the build attempts to upload an >artifact. It looks like 405 means that the upload method was not allowed. > >The new instance is running on the same port as our live instance of >Archiva 1.3.5 (different host though), so I don't think the application >being built has a port number that needs to be changed. The main >difference is that 1.3.5 is running with tomcat and 2.0.1 is using the >included jetty. Could we be missing some setting in jetty.xml which is >set correctly in our 1.3.5 instance? Any other ideas? > >Thanks, >David >
