You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to repository@apache.org by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> on 2006/03/22 08:24:16 UTC

Repository not up to the task??

Hi,
If it is common for ASF projects to look for setting up their own Maven2 
repositories, I think something is not right;

http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cocoon-dev/200603.mbox/<4420DE34.6090803%40dslextreme.com>

What is the general advice for Cocoon and others in this matter?? 


Cheers
Niclas

Re: Repository not up to the task??

Posted by Brett Porter <br...@gmail.com>.
I've never had a problem using cvs.apache.org.

Regardless, I'm fine with projects managing their own *development*
repositories, as long as they are using the *release* repository
correctly (and not hooking their projects up to use it directly).

 -Brett

On 3/22/06, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> If it is common for ASF projects to look for setting up their own Maven2
> repositories, I think something is not right;
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cocoon-dev/200603.mbox/<4420DE34.6090803%40dslextreme.com>
>
> What is the general advice for Cocoon and others in this matter??
>
>
> Cheers
> Niclas
>

Re: Repository not up to the task??

Posted by Steve Loughran <st...@gmail.com>.
On 3/22/06, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday 22 March 2006 15:26, Dion Gillard wrote:
> > Could they not rely on unreleased software? cvs.apache.org is for SNAPSHOTs
> > and unreleased software only?
>
> That was my first suggestion, but...
> Secondly, I suggested that those jars are checked into SVN, as IMHO projects
> should remain buildable in the future, at least "most of the time". But with
> snapshots, either cvs.a.o or a temporary server, WILL disappear over time.

The rule that we now enforce in apache WS (after something that broke
the rule escaped), is that
-every release cannot depend on -SNAPSHOT versions of things

without that, you dont have the ability to rebuild stuff exactly as
they were, as you depend upon the state of the remote cvs.apache.org
repository.


-steve

Re: Repository not up to the task??

Posted by Carlos Sanchez <ca...@apache.org>.
On 3/23/06, Jorg Heymans <jh...@apache.org> wrote:
> Actually there were timeout problems with ibiblio itself at some point,
> they seem to be resolved now - what was the solution there?

Nothing was changed. ibiblio doesn't have snapshots so it's only
queried once. There are some mirrors but I don't think people use them
a lot.

--
I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
                             -- The Princess Bride

Re: Repository not up to the task??

Posted by Jorg Heymans <jh...@apache.org>.
Henri Yandell wrote:

> I've been having the same problem trying to build Geronimo.  If I
> leave the apache.org snapshot repositories in, Maven 2.0.2 will die
> with timeout errors. Also takes forever. Without them, it's very
> speedy.

Yes and that's exactly what we are hoping to avoid by moving any lib we
still use off cvs.a.o to our own server. When that server proves
reliable again we'll start using it. At the moment it is affecting our
build process and anyone wanting to try out our new m2 based core.

Note that this will not affect the deployment of our snapshots or
releases, they will still go to the proper destinations.

> Not a lot of info in maven -e about it either. Need to dig into it.

Actually there were timeout problems with ibiblio itself at some point,
they seem to be resolved now - what was the solution there?

Regards
Jorg

Re: Repository not up to the task??

Posted by Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>.
On 3/22/06, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday 22 March 2006 15:26, Dion Gillard wrote:
> > Could they not rely on unreleased software? cvs.apache.org is for SNAPSHOTs
> > and unreleased software only?
>
> That was my first suggestion, but...
> Secondly, I suggested that those jars are checked into SVN, as IMHO projects
> should remain buildable in the future, at least "most of the time". But with
> snapshots, either cvs.a.o or a temporary server, WILL disappear over time.

Gets my vote :)

> On Wednesday 22 March 2006 15:27, Brett Porter wrote:
> > I've never had a problem using cvs.apache.org.
>
> I find this odd as well, but it was insisted. I also suspect that the "go out
> and check if newer

I've been having the same problem trying to build Geronimo.  If I
leave the apache.org snapshot repositories in, Maven 2.0.2 will die
with timeout errors. Also takes forever. Without them, it's very
speedy.

Not a lot of info in maven -e about it either. Need to dig into it.

Hen

Re: Repository not up to the task??

Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org>.
Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On Wednesday 22 March 2006 15:26, Dion Gillard wrote:
>> Could they not rely on unreleased software? cvs.apache.org is for SNAPSHOTs
>> and unreleased software only?
> 
> That was my first suggestion, but...
> Secondly, I suggested that those jars are checked into SVN, as IMHO projects 
> should remain buildable in the future, at least "most of the time". But with 
> snapshots, either cvs.a.o or a temporary server, WILL disappear over time.

Not if you do a proper release. You're not supposed to release with 
snapshot versions of dependencies. Even if you are doing an interim 
release you can always resolve snapshot dependencies to their 
timestamped versions which does make them reproducible.

Jason van Zyl

Re: Repository not up to the task??

Posted by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org>.
On Wednesday 22 March 2006 15:26, Dion Gillard wrote:
> Could they not rely on unreleased software? cvs.apache.org is for SNAPSHOTs
> and unreleased software only?

That was my first suggestion, but...
Secondly, I suggested that those jars are checked into SVN, as IMHO projects 
should remain buildable in the future, at least "most of the time". But with 
snapshots, either cvs.a.o or a temporary server, WILL disappear over time.

On Wednesday 22 March 2006 15:27, Brett Porter wrote:
> I've never had a problem using cvs.apache.org.

I find this odd as well, but it was insisted. I also suspect that the "go out 
and check if newer 

> Regardless, I'm fine with projects managing their own *development*
> repositories, as long as they are using the *release* repository
> correctly (and not hooking their projects up to use it directly).

Well, in a way you are right. BUT, what happens when they are ready for a 
release and their dependencies are still snapshot or hand-converted Maven1 
artifacts? "We ain't stopping our release because of this..."

Perhaps I am too worried. Cocoon have traditionally only delivered source, and 
not binaries, and now when they are going Maven2 I suspect the jars are cut 
out of the source distro altogether, but binary distros has also been 
discussed, and maybe the answer is there.


Cheers
Niclas

Re: Repository not up to the task??

Posted by Dion Gillard <di...@gmail.com>.
Could they not rely on unreleased software? cvs.apache.org is for SNAPSHOTs
and unreleased software only?

On 3/22/06, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
> If it is common for ASF projects to look for setting up their own Maven2
> repositories, I think something is not right;
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cocoon-dev/200603.mbox/<
> 4420DE34.6090803%40dslextreme.com>
>
> What is the general advice for Cocoon and others in this matter??
>
>
> Cheers
> Niclas
>



--
http://www.multitask.com.au/people/dion/
Chuck Norris sleeps with a night light. Not because Chuck Norris is afraid
of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of Chuck Norris