On 4/25/06, Goodin, Brandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alexandre, > > First, thanks for your response. I appreciate you taking the time to answer > my thoughts. > > > Just one more thing I dislike about system dependencies I wanted > > to specify. A good practice is usually to do a > > complete project check out after a check in. Takes > > a lot of times when you have several jars bundled with your projects. > > This is a very contextual argument, which is what my point is. I think we > can all find reasons why we would opt for using the jar repository (as Simon > stated). But equally, I think there are contexts where we can make the > argument for not using the jar repository. In all the contexts I've worked > in thus far it takes me very little time to actually checkout my project... > jars included. This holds true for larger projects too. Disk space is cheap. > The strain on bandwidth is not a compelling enough argument due to the fact > that a check happens once every few hours in a system that has a continuous > build. Also, I don't think I've ever heard one complaint about disk space > usage or bandwidth usage when checking out source code containing libraries. > > Another thought occurred to me while I was writing this. What about other > binary elements that are in a source tree? Such as Images or PDFs. Should we > create a binary repository for them too? Or maybe we can setup a WebDAV for > those ;-) Sometimes these things are needed... but not every time. >
They follow the project versionning so they be stored in SVN. The difference is not based upon the file type but upon their versionning cycle. > > What is the difference between a > > internal corporation Maven repository and a internal corporation SVN > > repository setup on the same server? Nothing except Maven repository > > is better at handling dependencies then SVN. > > You really make my point here :). You pose the question "What's the > difference?". My answer is "very little or none". So if there isn't a > compelling difference for my project it becomes extra baggage that I would > prefer not to have. Shouldn't it be an optional, planned and acceptable > practice not to use it? Yeah, but dependencies have a versionning scheme of their own that don't follow the project one. It wouldn't make any sense to me to put other project sources in my project SVN repository either. Here why I think dependencies repositories have a purpose. > > So, the difference is: > 1) I only need one repository SVN > 2) I only need to make one call to SVN See my previous comment. > > I think Simon has very valid points and has made a stab at a solution. Would > an enhancement request to more openly support source tree based jars be > welcomed? I am not a developper so I don't know. You should ask on the dev list. > > I want to reemphasize that I really appreciate the hard work the Maven > developers have put in. I really enjoy much of Maven. I just believe the > dependency options are too strict and need to provide additional support. > No problem, I also appreciate this discussion but I have a strong opinion on this subject as you can see :) I prefer to put jar in Maven repositories because it allow different teams to work on interdependent project quite easily. > Thank you all for your dialog on this, > Brandon Goodin > > "Start simple and grow to complexity... when necessary" > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
