Ben Walding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >You have to wonder if the shared local repo might be a useful thing to >have in addition to personal local repo.
>personal local -> shared local -> remote repo1 -> remote repo2 >Items would only be copied into personal local if they came from remote >repo * >This is definitely a use case that codehaus would be able to use. i.e. >shared "untrusted" users ;). It would also be highly applicable for a >site such as sourceforge where you don't want to mirror multiple full >local repos. Being able to add a "shared repository" that contains all of the jars required by maven itself would already be a huge win. I once had patches for this (http://maven.intermeta.de/rpm/) but there was no interest from the maven developers to get them. Still I'd like to see a clean separation between jars needed by maven to run its tasks and the application. Ideally ~/.maven/repo would contain only jars actually downloaded by the developer himself and could be nuked with rm -rf without any harm to the installation. >Perhaps for maven2 / maven-new / maven-ng... Sure. ;-) "A man can dream. A man can dream." (Prof. Hubert J. Farnsworth). Regards Henning >Jason van Zyl wrote: >>On Wed, 2003-07-16 at 17:42, did wrote: >> >> >>>Just a question: >>> >>>I would like to understand what is the motivation to let Maven puts his >>>repository onto ~/.maven ??? >>>This would lead to as many repositories as connected users... >>> >>> >> >>This is no different then it has been in the past but I'll explain the >>reasoning. >> >>As far as a repository per user, that's always been an option. So that >>each user has a single repository of artifacts as opposed to having a >>duplicated artifacts in lib/ directories of each build. One repository >>per user is a lot better than having N copies of xerces lying around. >> >>We made the new default directory for the repository ~/.maven so that >>it is easier to upgrade Maven when the repository isn't hiding inside >>$MAVEN_HOME. Upon inspection maybe this shouldn't have been made .maven >>as I'm not sure if this is still a problem for Windows users. I haven't >>used a Windows box in 5 years so I don't know. >> >>We also started using ~/.maven so that there was a place to expand the >>plugins so that there would be a local cache for each user and the base >>installation could be read-only. >> >>You can always override the property that controls where the local >>repository is. If you and your co-developers have a shared drive then >>you can share a local repository by pointing at a shared directory. >> >> >> >>>Regards, >>>Did. >>> >>> >>>Andy Jefferson wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>On Tue, 2003-07-15 at 22:08, Jason van Zyl wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>The default value for maven.repo.local is now defined in the >>>>>default.properties file and it has a value of: >>>>> >>>>>${maven.home.local}/repository >>>>> >>>>>This will default to >>>>> >>>>>~/.maven/repository >>>>> >>>>>So you can override the value of maven.repo.local to set it to whatever >>>>>you desire but it now defaults to ~/.maven/repository to enable to use >>>>>of shared repositories. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>Thanks Jason, >>>> >>>>I've set ~/build.properties and it finds the shared repository and >>>>downloads into that. The next problem I have is that I have 2 >>>>dependencies >>>> >>>><dependency> >>>> <groupId>xdoclet</groupId> >>>> <artifactId>xdoclet-ejb-module</artifactId> >>>> <version>1.2b4</version> >>>> <url>http://xdoclet.sourceforge.net/</url> >>>> </dependency> >>>><dependency> >>>> <groupId>xdoclet</groupId> >>>> <artifactId>xjavadoc</artifactId> >>>> <version>1.0</version> >>>> <url>http://xdoclet.sourceforge.net/</url> >>>></dependency> >>>> >>>>In beta9 this went to the repository and found >>>>xdoclet/jars/xdoclet-web-module-1.2b4.jar >>>>xdoclet/jars/xjavadoc-1.0.jar >>>> >>>>In beta10 this finds the >>>>xdoclet/jars/xdoclet-web-module-1.2b4.jar >>>> >>>>BUT complains about the second one and seems to be looking for >>>>xdoclet/jars/xdoclet-xjavadoc-1.0.jar >>>> >>>> >>>>Is this correct behaviour ? Why is it putting the groupId as a prefix >>>>for the second one yet didn't add it on for the first one ? >>>> >>>> >>>>TIA >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >>> >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen INTERMETA GmbH [EMAIL PROTECTED] +49 9131 50 654 0 http://www.intermeta.de/ Java, perl, Solaris, Linux, xSP Consulting, Web Services freelance consultant -- Jakarta Turbine Development -- hero for hire --- Quote of the week: "It is pointless to tell people anything when you know that they won't process the message." --- Jonathan Revusky --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
