james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Burrell Donkin" <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [JSieve] pom's in stage
Date Mon, 08 Oct 2007 19:30:10 GMT
On 10/8/07, Stefano Bagnara <apache@bago.org> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
> > On 10/8/07, Stefano Bagnara <apache@bago.org> wrote:
> >> The alternative is still the #3 from the original post:
> >>> 3) change the dependencies groupdIds/artifactIds for the "problematic"
> >>> artifacts and move them to the new folders. Alter the pom to declare
> >>> this new dependencies. E.g: move javax.mail/jars/mail-1.4.jar to
> >>> org.apache.james.dep/jars/mail-1.4.jar or something similar. Even if we
> >>> don't put there the poms mvn will work creating a "standard" pom with no
> >>> dependencies and will deploy to the local repository our own "artifacts"
> >>> without clashing with official poms/artifacts from central. This is make
> >>> the offline build to work without placing bad stuff in the local
> >>> repository but we will declare dependencies on artifacts not existing on
> >>> central.
> >> opinions?
> >
> > #3 introduces bad meta-data into the maven repository
> No, I proposed #3 because it does not put bad meta-data in the
> repository. It only put there "custom" data. We should only take care to
> use our own groupIds and no build will be corrupted by our poms.
> Let's say we add "jsieve" or "james" to the groupId, we can be sure no
> one else will have references to this artifacts.

bad meta-data is bad meta-data - whether it's published in the apache
repository or not

> IMHO the only drawback is that we cannot publish our "jsieve" pom in the
> maven repository because we have dependencies on artifacts that are not
> in the repository. But this already happens for james and mailets jars,
> so I don't think this is a big issue. If we want to publish jsieve in a
> maven repository we'll have to fix many other problems, first (or to
> avoid declaring the dependencies).

i'm confused: which issues in particular?

> > what would maven do if we just removed all the pom's from the local repository?
> If we remove the poms and leave the jars under existing
> groupId/jars/artifactId-version.jar scheme then it will try to lookup
> the poms online, if it finds the pom it download it, otherwise it
> creates simple poms with no dependencies (they contains artifactId,
> groupId and version). This maven-generated poms are the ones that could
> break any other project depending on the same artifacts and building
> against the same local repository

by local respository do you mean the stage directory or ~/.mvn (or
whatever the path is)?

- robert

To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org

View raw message