You got the point. But that "quality information" (whatever it's form would be), could do things like: - describe the overall quality of repo (let's name it the MRQ score) - the list (or only the count) of "rules"/"tests" ran (so, a repo of MRQ score 5 with 5 tests would be "less good" than a repo with MRQ score 5 but checked with 15 tests), to be able to compare reposes between each other (if for example the MRQ would be defined as "mean value of tests ran against it or something like that). Or something much more sophisticated... but you got the idea. - the list of "problematic" or simply "unusable" or "less then qualifiable" parts/GAVs/trees of repo itself. Tresholds could be wired in the tooling and make them universal (minimal compliance set, good to have compliance set, superb compliance set) - etc
Sci Fiction part: You could have a simple maven plugin, that would try to read these informations from reposes participating in your build (i know this would have some issues in 2.2.x, but i believe maven3 would be able to cope with this) on initialize phase of your build, and spit you huge warnings about "problematic reposes are in your build", or better, if you pull an artifact from "problematic" set/tree have an option to fail the build/throw huge warning, etc But one problem here is the "grouping feature" of almost all MRMs: and maven simply looses the information from where came an artifact... ~t~ On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Albert Kurucz <[email protected]>wrote: > Very nice idea to measure the quality. > But sorry Tamas, 50% corrupt or 90% corrupt does not make a difference for > me. > Especially not, when I have feeling that it is possible to maintain a > 100% clean repo with the right automation tools. > If Sonatype's goal is to sell these tools only for paying customers I > don't have a bad feeling about that. Everyone has to make a living. > But I hope sometime similar tools and a clean repo will be available > for the open public. > I hope OSS developers will recognize the need for quality (and a high > quality repo). > > On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Hervé BOUTEMY <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Le samedi 26 septembre 2009, Tamás Cservenák a écrit : > >> I think we all need some clarification, since we all talk about > "quality" > >> (we all agreed upon the basic things unanimously). > >> What is the "quality" of a maven repository (in general)? Can we measure > >> it? Can we define it? > >> > >> A wiki page with piled up (even personal) opinions would be good -- > > don't hesitate to start one on MAVENUSER Wiki [1] > > > >> whatever they are -- and later we should cherry-pick the most relevant > ones > >> to build some tooling to build these metric. And then, we could > "measure" > >> the quality of different reposes (like central) and have a list of > reposes > >> that do meet certain "level of quality" and list publicly the others > that > >> does not. > > > > [1] http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVENUSER/Home > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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] > >
