I agree that a point system is pointless.

I mostly care about whether an artifact is well-formed. I don't depend on
maven central to help me make business decisions about what open source
components to depend on. If I need a component, I do the research to see
what exists, what has a live community, what the licenses are, etc. Finally,
when I know that I want something, I go see if its on central. If it's not,
then I grumble and make arrangements to get to it from my local nexus
instance. All I need to know from central is whether it contains a
functional, up-to-date artifact set f whatever component I've determined
that I want to use.


On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 5:13 AM, Anders Kristian Andersen <
[email protected]> wrote:

> I hope I get this right
> Jason here states that there should only be one central
>
> And yes we can ONLY have ONE central. And this is the ONE we got today !!!!
> That must be the game we are playing.
> The community must be able to TRUST maven / central.
> Starting changing this could cause doubt, and a very easy attach zone for
> competitors...
>
> When this is stated....
> We must acknowledge we got problems !!!
> The central is full of legacy, some artifacts that even might not work,
> moved etc.
>
> Here the solution can be to add deprecation lists or better
> component-qualtiy-attributes (an xml file next to a component)
>
> To speak clear: pom.xml xx.jar xxx.war ... is read-only.
>
> But a component-quality-attribute.xml file can be maintained, and updated.
>
> The quality attributes can be like:
>        deprecated false / true .. when true + a description
>        runs-JVM-1.5  true/  (false + description / problem reference )
>        runs-JVM-1.6    true/  (false + description / problem reference )
>        runs-JVM-1.7  true/  (false + description / problem reference )
>        runs-JVM-1.8  when this becomes relevant
>        is-moved  (no) or path to new location
>
>        osgi-compliant true / false
>        ivy-enabled  true /false
>        groovy-enabled
>
>        maven-2 enabled true  / false  ... most of our maven-2 artifacts
> should hopefully have true here :-)
>        maven-3 enabled (soon..)
>        maven-4 enabled (when this becomes relevant)
>
>        various PMD level compliant
>
>
> I here by tries to state that we cannot predict the future.
> What today seens perfect, might tomorrow be less usable.
>
>
> With such attributes users can select the artifacts matching their demands.
> I am not sure a point system from 1..10 will match the requirements.
>
> Best regards
> Anders Kristian Andersen
>
>
>
>
>
> On 26/09/2009, at 21.15, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>
>> 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]
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

Reply via email to