On 2009-09-26, at 10:58 AM, Albert Kurucz 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).
Not having a super high quality central repository actually makes our
commercial efforts a lot harder. If I was devious I would have agreed
with Brett and would make a completely clean central repository as our
plans require intact repositories. But we don't have a clean
repository and trying to make a separate one would be a disaster for
general use. You have to live with what's there and Sonatype will
actually invest in cleaning up the generally available repository. We
already have with efforts like this:
http://nexus.sonatype.org/oss-repository-hosting.html
It would actually cost us more in support with our clients to maintain
a dirty Maven Central and a clean Maven Central with the confusion,
interoperability problems and general issues of potential distrust it
just makes no business sense. Now the information we want to add is of
enormous value but it's predicated on generally improving the quality
of Maven Central. I don't want Sonatype to be known as the company
that stole Maven Central, doesn't do us any good. So trying to
sequester improved metadata somewhere is pointless. If the base
information is not good, then the whole system is crippled and that
screws Sonatype as well as everyone else.
So the information in Maven Central on a per-project basis I see
increasing greatly with some tools that Sonatype is developing in
Nexus and M2Eclipse and this will benefit all Maven users generally.
I'm certainly going to leverage that improved information, but so can
anyone else.
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]
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
