You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@maven.apache.org by Costin Caraivan <cc...@axway.com> on 2009/10/22 10:43:57 UTC
Why are repositories usually separated into releases and snapshots?
Hello,
I saw that most repositories are separated into releases and snapshots. And
that most repository managers recommend using releases and snapshots.
Now, I know what each of them is:
1. release -> stable version, will be uploaded only once, when you want to
change something you make a new release.
2. snapshots -> development version, usually overwritten (you can keep
multiple snapshots, but it's not usually done)
What are the benefits of having 2 separate repos? Cons & pros. Pros & cons
:)
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Why-are-repositories-usually-separated-into-releases-and-snapshots--tp26006147p26006147.html
Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Why are repositories usually separated into releases and
snapshots?
Posted by Yaakov Chaikin <ya...@gmail.com>.
That's certainly seems like one good reason...
Another reason is that your unreleased snapshots are going to trash
your release repository... This, of course, depends on how you
build...
For example, on our project, I didn't at first care to use the
snapshots repository and just had everything pointed to the release
one. Well, we have a continuous build server which, among other
things, hourly builds and deploys the latest successfully tested
codebase into our archiva repository.
Long story short, our repository grew to 17GB. When I removed all the
unneeded shapshot builds from archiva, it went down to 250MB. (That's
after I had to wait a very long time for the 17GB to back up just so I
wouldn't mess anything up by deleting stuff).
If I had separated them to begin with, our snapshot repository would
become a simple "development workspace" repository, which is what
snapshots are... So, I guess, the moral of the story that it's bad to
mix your development workspace artifacts with artifacts that are to be
released to the client. It's like mixing your unreleased code with
releasable software in one directory (not a 100% parallel, but I think
the point comes across).
Yaakov.
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Stephen Duncan Jr
<st...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 9:36 PM, David Weintraub <qa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> No one has answered the basic question: Why two repositories?
>>
>> I know the differences between a release and snapshot. but that doesn't
>> explain why the releases and snapshots are in two separate repositories.
>> Why
>> not keep both snapshots and releases in the same repository. We know
>> something is a snapshot simply because it has the word "SNAPSHOT" appended
>> to it.
>>
>> Because of the dual repository structure, I have to configure everything
>> with two separate repository names, two separate repository URLs, and two
>> sets of accounts and passwords. So, why not simply have a single repository
>> which can store both snapshots and releases?
>>
>> These are the only reasons I can think of:
>>
>> * Administration: Backing up a release repository is extremely important.
>> Backing up snapshots -- not so much. But, is this actually true?
>>
>> * Who can see what. I might want my snapshot repository available to my
>> developers, but not to the world. However, this would be more of something
>> my repository management software should be able to do.
>>
>> * Releases should only be added to the release repository by a release
>> manager, and not by any developer. However, snapshots would be added by
>> developers. Again, this seems better handled via my repository management
>> software.
>>
>> So, what is the reason to have two separate and distinct repositories for
>> snapshots and for releases?
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 4:43 AM, Costin Caraivan <ccaraivan@axway.com
>> >wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> David Weintraub
>> qazwart@gmail.com
>>
>
>
> I think both security and administration were the original reasons. It's
> easier to say now "well, the repository manager can make the distinction
> between releases and snapshots", but you couldn't assume the existence of
> sophisticated repository managers when Maven 2 was initially
> designed/released. At that time simple file-system repositories independent
> of Maven were used (scp/sftp/webdav).
>
> --
> Stephen Duncan Jr
> www.stephenduncanjr.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Why are repositories usually separated into releases and
snapshots?
Posted by Stephen Duncan Jr <st...@gmail.com>.
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 9:36 PM, David Weintraub <qa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No one has answered the basic question: Why two repositories?
>
> I know the differences between a release and snapshot. but that doesn't
> explain why the releases and snapshots are in two separate repositories.
> Why
> not keep both snapshots and releases in the same repository. We know
> something is a snapshot simply because it has the word "SNAPSHOT" appended
> to it.
>
> Because of the dual repository structure, I have to configure everything
> with two separate repository names, two separate repository URLs, and two
> sets of accounts and passwords. So, why not simply have a single repository
> which can store both snapshots and releases?
>
> These are the only reasons I can think of:
>
> * Administration: Backing up a release repository is extremely important.
> Backing up snapshots -- not so much. But, is this actually true?
>
> * Who can see what. I might want my snapshot repository available to my
> developers, but not to the world. However, this would be more of something
> my repository management software should be able to do.
>
> * Releases should only be added to the release repository by a release
> manager, and not by any developer. However, snapshots would be added by
> developers. Again, this seems better handled via my repository management
> software.
>
> So, what is the reason to have two separate and distinct repositories for
> snapshots and for releases?
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 4:43 AM, Costin Caraivan <ccaraivan@axway.com
> >wrote:
>
>
>
> --
> David Weintraub
> qazwart@gmail.com
>
I think both security and administration were the original reasons. It's
easier to say now "well, the repository manager can make the distinction
between releases and snapshots", but you couldn't assume the existence of
sophisticated repository managers when Maven 2 was initially
designed/released. At that time simple file-system repositories independent
of Maven were used (scp/sftp/webdav).
--
Stephen Duncan Jr
www.stephenduncanjr.com
Re: Why are repositories usually separated into releases and snapshots?
Posted by Sahoo <Sa...@Sun.COM>.
Sometime back I had the exact question in my mind and QoS (what you
mentioned as administration) and security were the only ones I could
think of.
Thanks,
Sahoo
David Weintraub wrote:
> No one has answered the basic question: Why two repositories?
>
> I know the differences between a release and snapshot. but that doesn't
> explain why the releases and snapshots are in two separate repositories. Why
> not keep both snapshots and releases in the same repository. We know
> something is a snapshot simply because it has the word "SNAPSHOT" appended
> to it.
>
> Because of the dual repository structure, I have to configure everything
> with two separate repository names, two separate repository URLs, and two
> sets of accounts and passwords. So, why not simply have a single repository
> which can store both snapshots and releases?
>
> These are the only reasons I can think of:
>
> * Administration: Backing up a release repository is extremely important.
> Backing up snapshots -- not so much. But, is this actually true?
>
> * Who can see what. I might want my snapshot repository available to my
> developers, but not to the world. However, this would be more of something
> my repository management software should be able to do.
>
> * Releases should only be added to the release repository by a release
> manager, and not by any developer. However, snapshots would be added by
> developers. Again, this seems better handled via my repository management
> software.
>
> So, what is the reason to have two separate and distinct repositories for
> snapshots and for releases?
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 4:43 AM, Costin Caraivan <cc...@axway.com>wrote:
>
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I saw that most repositories are separated into releases and snapshots. And
>> that most repository managers recommend using releases and snapshots.
>>
>> Now, I know what each of them is:
>> 1. release -> stable version, will be uploaded only once, when you want to
>> change something you make a new release.
>> 2. snapshots -> development version, usually overwritten (you can keep
>> multiple snapshots, but it's not usually done)
>>
>> What are the benefits of having 2 separate repos? Cons & pros. Pros & cons
>> :)
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Why-are-repositories-usually-separated-into-releases-and-snapshots--tp26006147p26006147.html
>> Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Why are repositories usually separated into releases and
snapshots?
Posted by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>.
2009/10/25 Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>:
>
>
> Sent from my [rhymes with tryPod] ;-)
>
> On 25 Oct 2009, at 01:36, David Weintraub <qa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> No one has answered the basic question: Why two repositories?
>>
>> I know the differences between a release and snapshot. but that doesn't
>> explain why the releases and snapshots are in two separate repositories.
>> Why
>> not keep both snapshots and releases in the same repository. We know
>> something is a snapshot simply because it has the word "SNAPSHOT" appended
>> to it.
>>
>
> well actually, that only applies if you turn off timestamped snapshots, and
> timestamped snapshots are the only kind allowed for 3.x
>
>> Because of the dual repository structure, I have to configure everything
>> with two separate repository names, two separate repository URLs, and two
>> sets of accounts and passwords. So, why not simply have a single
>> repository
>> which can store both snapshots and releases?
>
> if you use a repository manager, you can group the snapshots and releases so
> that the storage is separate but you access the one repository
>
>>
>> These are the only reasons I can think of:
>>
>> * Administration: Backing up a release repository is extremely important.
>> Backing up snapshots -- not so much. But, is this actually true?
>>
>> * Who can see what. I might want my snapshot repository available to my
>> developers, but not to the world. However, this would be more of something
>> my repository management software should be able to do.
>>
>> * Releases should only be added to the release repository by a release
>> manager, and not by any developer. However, snapshots would be added by
>> developers. Again, this seems better handled via my repository management
>> software.
>>
>> So, what is the reason to have two separate and distinct repositories for
>> snapshots and for releases?
>
> update frequency, you may want to check snapshots with a greater or lesser
> frequency than releases
>
> resolving ranges, ranges are only resolved from release repositories (this
> is either a bug or deliberate) so if you have a repository enabled for both
> releases and snapshots then any ranges for artifacts from such a repository
> will resolve snapshots within the range
not that this is different from a snapshot in your local repository
being resolved in a range
if I build foo locally and it has a dependency on bar [1,) then I
expect to get the latest release of bar eg 1.3
if I then locally build and mvn install bar eg 1.4-SNAPSHOT then
rebuilding foo I would expect my local bar version to win in the range
which it will because it is in my local metadata
I think that some aspects of how this works currently leave a lot to
be desired, but for now, if you use ranges, you *must* keep the repos
separate
>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 4:43 AM, Costin Caraivan
>> <cc...@axway.com>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I saw that most repositories are separated into releases and snapshots.
>>> And
>>> that most repository managers recommend using releases and snapshots.
>>>
>>> Now, I know what each of them is:
>>> 1. release -> stable version, will be uploaded only once, when you want
>>> to
>>> change something you make a new release.
>>> 2. snapshots -> development version, usually overwritten (you can keep
>>> multiple snapshots, but it's not usually done)
>>>
>>> What are the benefits of having 2 separate repos? Cons & pros. Pros &
>>> cons
>>> :)
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>>
>>> http://www.nabble.com/Why-are-repositories-usually-separated-into-releases-and-snapshots--tp26006147p26006147.html
>>> Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> David Weintraub
>> qazwart@gmail.com
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Why are repositories usually separated into releases and
snapshots?
Posted by Barrie Treloar <ba...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Stephen Connolly
<st...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> So, what is the reason to have two separate and distinct repositories for
>> snapshots and for releases?
>
> update frequency, you may want to check snapshots with a greater or lesser
> frequency than releases
>
> resolving ranges, ranges are only resolved from release repositories (this
> is either a bug or deliberate) so if you have a repository enabled for both
> releases and snapshots then any ranges for artifacts from such a repository
> will resolve snapshots within the range
And, if you are lazy and dont lock down version numbers the last thing
you want is to grab an potentially unstable SNAPSHOT version.
Releases have more rigor around them, so its less risky to
automatically grab the latest version.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Why are repositories usually separated into releases and snapshots?
Posted by Stephen Connolly <st...@gmail.com>.
Sent from my [rhymes with tryPod] ;-)
On 25 Oct 2009, at 01:36, David Weintraub <qa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No one has answered the basic question: Why two repositories?
>
> I know the differences between a release and snapshot. but that
> doesn't
> explain why the releases and snapshots are in two separate
> repositories. Why
> not keep both snapshots and releases in the same repository. We know
> something is a snapshot simply because it has the word "SNAPSHOT"
> appended
> to it.
>
well actually, that only applies if you turn off timestamped
snapshots, and timestamped snapshots are the only kind allowed for 3.x
> Because of the dual repository structure, I have to configure
> everything
> with two separate repository names, two separate repository URLs,
> and two
> sets of accounts and passwords. So, why not simply have a single
> repository
> which can store both snapshots and releases?
if you use a repository manager, you can group the snapshots and
releases so that the storage is separate but you access the one
repository
>
> These are the only reasons I can think of:
>
> * Administration: Backing up a release repository is extremely
> important.
> Backing up snapshots -- not so much. But, is this actually true?
>
> * Who can see what. I might want my snapshot repository available to
> my
> developers, but not to the world. However, this would be more of
> something
> my repository management software should be able to do.
>
> * Releases should only be added to the release repository by a release
> manager, and not by any developer. However, snapshots would be added
> by
> developers. Again, this seems better handled via my repository
> management
> software.
>
> So, what is the reason to have two separate and distinct
> repositories for
> snapshots and for releases?
update frequency, you may want to check snapshots with a greater or
lesser frequency than releases
resolving ranges, ranges are only resolved from release repositories
(this is either a bug or deliberate) so if you have a repository
enabled for both releases and snapshots then any ranges for artifacts
from such a repository will resolve snapshots within the range
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 4:43 AM, Costin Caraivan
> <cc...@axway.com>wrote:
>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I saw that most repositories are separated into releases and
>> snapshots. And
>> that most repository managers recommend using releases and snapshots.
>>
>> Now, I know what each of them is:
>> 1. release -> stable version, will be uploaded only once, when you
>> want to
>> change something you make a new release.
>> 2. snapshots -> development version, usually overwritten (you can
>> keep
>> multiple snapshots, but it's not usually done)
>>
>> What are the benefits of having 2 separate repos? Cons & pros. Pros
>> & cons
>> :)
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Why-are-repositories-usually-separated-into-releases-and-snapshots--tp26006147p26006147.html
>> Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> David Weintraub
> qazwart@gmail.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Why are repositories usually separated into releases and
snapshots?
Posted by David Weintraub <qa...@gmail.com>.
No one has answered the basic question: Why two repositories?
I know the differences between a release and snapshot. but that doesn't
explain why the releases and snapshots are in two separate repositories. Why
not keep both snapshots and releases in the same repository. We know
something is a snapshot simply because it has the word "SNAPSHOT" appended
to it.
Because of the dual repository structure, I have to configure everything
with two separate repository names, two separate repository URLs, and two
sets of accounts and passwords. So, why not simply have a single repository
which can store both snapshots and releases?
These are the only reasons I can think of:
* Administration: Backing up a release repository is extremely important.
Backing up snapshots -- not so much. But, is this actually true?
* Who can see what. I might want my snapshot repository available to my
developers, but not to the world. However, this would be more of something
my repository management software should be able to do.
* Releases should only be added to the release repository by a release
manager, and not by any developer. However, snapshots would be added by
developers. Again, this seems better handled via my repository management
software.
So, what is the reason to have two separate and distinct repositories for
snapshots and for releases?
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 4:43 AM, Costin Caraivan <cc...@axway.com>wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I saw that most repositories are separated into releases and snapshots. And
> that most repository managers recommend using releases and snapshots.
>
> Now, I know what each of them is:
> 1. release -> stable version, will be uploaded only once, when you want to
> change something you make a new release.
> 2. snapshots -> development version, usually overwritten (you can keep
> multiple snapshots, but it's not usually done)
>
> What are the benefits of having 2 separate repos? Cons & pros. Pros & cons
> :)
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Why-are-repositories-usually-separated-into-releases-and-snapshots--tp26006147p26006147.html
> Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
--
David Weintraub
qazwart@gmail.com
RE: Why are repositories usually separated into releases and snapshots?
Posted by Todd Thiessen <th...@nortel.com>.
Very interesting discussion. We have been having some of the exact same
discussions.
A lot of it comes down to what one defines as a team. Is a team a
collection of 3 developers working on a very specific part of a larger
system? Or, on the complete other side of the spectrum, is it 100
developers working on the entire system?
I don't think there is a cut and dry answer. We have made our public
group contain all our internal snapshot and released artifact and give
the teams the choice whether or not they should point to another teams
snapshots or released artifacts. Using snapshot can really foster a more
agile environment and really help improve feature and bug fix turnaround
time. Particularly on larger projects. There are cons of course too but
I feel the pros tends to win out.
Of course we still have some teams who don't use snapshots at all. The
concept of a maven snapshot is very new to many and can be a bit
difficult to get ones head around.
---
Todd Thiessen
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian Fox [mailto:brianf@infinity.nu]
> Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 1:18 PM
> To: Maven Users List
> Subject: Re: Why are repositories usually separated into
> releases and snapshots?
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Martin Gainty
> <mg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > a snapshot usually has no guarantee of passing any sort of
> test....its
> > a way for a programmer/developer to prove that the
> developer assigned
> > has done *something*..but the snapshot carries no guarantee
> has passed
> > completely thru the SDLC validation lifecycle
> >
> > a release carries much more weight..basically
> >
>
> Right, I tend to forget that aspect, it's just natural to me.
> It's also recommended that you use snapshot for intra-team
> dependencies, but use releases for inter-team dependences.
> Take an OSS model for example, we try to avoid picking up
> snapshot dependencies of other oss projects we depend upon in
> Maven. We typically wait for a release before updating. If
> you aren't careful and you've mixed releases and snapshots
> together in the same repo, then it's difficult to give people
> access to one without the other.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Why are repositories usually separated into releases and
snapshots?
Posted by Brian Fox <br...@infinity.nu>.
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Martin Gainty <mg...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> a snapshot usually has no guarantee of passing any sort of test....its a way for a programmer/developer to prove
> that the developer assigned has done *something*..but the snapshot carries no guarantee has passed completely thru the SDLC validation lifecycle
>
> a release carries much more weight..basically
>
Right, I tend to forget that aspect, it's just natural to me. It's
also recommended that you use snapshot for intra-team dependencies,
but use releases for inter-team dependences. Take an OSS model for
example, we try to avoid picking up snapshot dependencies of other oss
projects we depend upon in Maven. We typically wait for a release
before updating. If you aren't careful and you've mixed releases and
snapshots together in the same repo, then it's difficult to give
people access to one without the other.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
RE: Why are repositories usually separated into releases and
snapshots?
Posted by Martin Gainty <mg...@hotmail.com>.
a snapshot usually has no guarantee of passing any sort of test....its a way for a programmer/developer to prove
that the developer assigned has done *something*..but the snapshot carries no guarantee has passed completely thru the SDLC validation lifecycle
a release carries much more weight..basically
all resources are identified and present and are of the correct version
the entire project will compile and 'build' usually to a war/ear/jar or to a zip/bz/tar or self-extracting jar
ALL of the <n/http/j>unit, regression and integration tests have been executed and verified that the code contained within does what its supposed to do
(usually specified in ReleaseNotes.html)
the next step for a build manager is to call for GA (general acceptance) which involves a formal signoff from all who test the product
the developer may or may not override a decision on a *failed* feature depending on a vote of whether that feature should be pushed to the next release
anyone else?
Martin
______________________________________________
Verzicht und Vertraulichkeitanmerkung/Note de déni et de confidentialité
Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich. Sollten Sie nicht der vorgesehene Empfaenger sein, so bitten wir hoeflich um eine Mitteilung. Jede unbefugte Weiterleitung oder Fertigung einer Kopie ist unzulaessig. Diese Nachricht dient lediglich dem Austausch von Informationen und entfaltet keine rechtliche Bindungswirkung. Aufgrund der leichten Manipulierbarkeit von E-Mails koennen wir keine Haftung fuer den Inhalt uebernehmen.
Ce message est confidentiel et peut être privilégié. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire prévu, nous te demandons avec bonté que pour satisfaire informez l'expéditeur. N'importe quelle diffusion non autorisée ou la copie de ceci est interdite. Ce message sert à l'information seulement et n'aura pas n'importe quel effet légalement obligatoire. Étant donné que les email peuvent facilement être sujets à la manipulation, nous ne pouvons accepter aucune responsabilité pour le contenu fourni.
> From: brianf@infinity.nu
> Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 08:03:37 -0400
> Subject: Re: Why are repositories usually separated into releases and snapshots?
> To: users@maven.apache.org
>
> It's essentially because of what you wrote below. You may want to be
> very diligent about backing up your release repo, but not so rigorous
> for snapshots. Snapshots tend to take up a lot more disk than releases
> because there are many copies of it when you use timestamps. This
> requires cleanup and metadata update at times. The less often you
> touch your release repo to start removing and changing things, the
> safer the data there is.
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 4:43 AM, Costin Caraivan <cc...@axway.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I saw that most repositories are separated into releases and snapshots. And
> > that most repository managers recommend using releases and snapshots.
> >
> > Now, I know what each of them is:
> > 1. release -> stable version, will be uploaded only once, when you want to
> > change something you make a new release.
> > 2. snapshots -> development version, usually overwritten (you can keep
> > multiple snapshots, but it's not usually done)
> >
> > What are the benefits of having 2 separate repos? Cons & pros. Pros & cons
> > :)
> > --
> > View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Why-are-repositories-usually-separated-into-releases-and-snapshots--tp26006147p26006147.html
> > Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
>
_________________________________________________________________
Windows 7: Simplify your PC. Learn more.
http://www.microsoft.com/Windows/windows-7/default.aspx?ocid=PID24727::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WWL_WIN_evergreen1:102009
Re: Why are repositories usually separated into releases and
snapshots?
Posted by Brian Fox <br...@infinity.nu>.
It's essentially because of what you wrote below. You may want to be
very diligent about backing up your release repo, but not so rigorous
for snapshots. Snapshots tend to take up a lot more disk than releases
because there are many copies of it when you use timestamps. This
requires cleanup and metadata update at times. The less often you
touch your release repo to start removing and changing things, the
safer the data there is.
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 4:43 AM, Costin Caraivan <cc...@axway.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I saw that most repositories are separated into releases and snapshots. And
> that most repository managers recommend using releases and snapshots.
>
> Now, I know what each of them is:
> 1. release -> stable version, will be uploaded only once, when you want to
> change something you make a new release.
> 2. snapshots -> development version, usually overwritten (you can keep
> multiple snapshots, but it's not usually done)
>
> What are the benefits of having 2 separate repos? Cons & pros. Pros & cons
> :)
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Why-are-repositories-usually-separated-into-releases-and-snapshots--tp26006147p26006147.html
> Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org