The one in the Dev Java Net repo looks like this:
<metadata>
<groupId>org.jvnet.jaxb2.maven2</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-jaxb2-plugin</artifactId>
<version>0.1</version>
<versioning>
<latest>0.5</latest>
<release>0.5</release>
<versions>
<version>0.1</version>
<version>0.2</version>
<version>0.4</version>
<version>0.4.M1</version>
<version>0.4.M2</version>
<version>0.4.M3</version>
<version>0.5</version>
</versions>
<lastUpdated>20071215123957</lastUpdated>
</versioning>
</metadata>
The one in archiva looks like this:
<metadata>
<groupId>org.jvnet.jaxb2</groupId>
<artifactId>maven2</artifactId>
<version>maven-jaxb2-plugin</version>
<versioning>
<lastUpdated>20071215123957</lastUpdated>
</versioning>
</metadata>
On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 13:51 -0700, Wendy Smoak wrote:
> On Jan 29, 2008 1:44 PM, Eric Miles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Figured out my problem although not sure why it's NOT a problem when I
> > don't use Archiva. This particular plugin (and no others) requires that
> > I specify the version in order for the dependency to be downloaded.
> > This isn't desirable as I'd like to have the upgrades to the plugins
> > when they happen, however this is a workaround.
> >
> > Is this particular plugin deployed incorrectly? Is that why
> > archiva/maven can not find the correct current version information?
>
> I'm curious, what does the maven-metadata.xml file look like through
> Archiva? Does it match what you see in the remote repo?
>
> (If it's missing the 'latest' and/or 'release' elements for a plugin,
> Maven will complain.)
>
> FWIW, specifying the plugin version is a best practice to help ensure
> reproducible builds.
>
