james-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Bagnara <apa...@bago.org>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] maven2 and james repository short term solution
Date Sun, 17 Sep 2006 00:22:32 GMT
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>> 4 days, 1 answer :-(
> 
> Try to be more clear about what you are proposing.

Sorry, I don't know how to make it more clear: I just reread it and I 
don't know what to add. Is there any specific point you don't understand?

>> Noel: can you please change the svn notification so that it works on the
>> full james repository? If you have specific options it would be good if
>> server commits had the server-dev reply-to and the other had the general
>> reply-to.
> 
> That does not seem appropriate.
> 
> It appears that you are proposing a Maven repository.  Aside from my
> continued opposition to supporting Maven repositories until Maven
> authenticates their downloads, such repositories are supposed to be
> coordinated ASF-wide via the repository@ mailing list.  I'm not at all sure
> that what you propose is according to ASF policy.

Can you point us to the policy that block us from creating a folder in 
the repository and put there the libraries our projects need to be 
build? I think we already do that in the lib folder of james/server, 
don't we?

This is a proposal to be able to make a jspf and mime4j release.
If you have an alternative proposal you're welcome: I don't think that 
the alternative proposal could be "don't release jspf/mime4j", so I 
would be happy to understand what can we do.

I believe other ASF projects have releases based on maven2 and uses the 
ibiblio repository for this. My proposal has been studied and done 
because of your concern. I did my homework. Stop.

>> we should introduce a james project third party library repository
>> where we'll include every "non-apache" library used by our releases.
> 
> We should NOT do so except in conjunction with such an effort on an ASF-wide
> basis.  We already have enough problems with abuse of the ASF
> infrastructure.  Once again, the appropriate place to discuss repositories
> is repository@apache.org.

This discussions are already in progress. The final solution will 
probably need a new maven version, and much more discussions.. We're 
probably few (or many) months far away from an ASF-wide solution, and in 
the mean time I believe we have to find an interim solution.

>> As a sidenote I would prefer a structure where we have
>> trunk/branches/tags at the top
> 
> Subversion 101: A {ttb} structure is associated with each independently
> releasable artifact.

You should better tell us what you prefer.
I don't see why "Subversion 101" should be taken as "the truth" ;-)

Btw this is a sidenote and not part of this proposal. So let's ignore it 
  by now.

Stefano



Mime
View raw message