You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@maven.apache.org by Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> on 2006/04/24 22:17:25 UTC
Dependencies Options
Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
checked out from the code repository?
Brandon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Dependencies Options
Posted by Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com>.
On 4/25/06, Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 4/24/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > It is *strongly* suggested that you do not utilize scope system. This
> > is available for the rare use case which actually requires it.
> >
> > In general, you should add dependencies to your local repo (or a
> > corporate repo, if you are using one) and use <dependency> in the
> > normal manner.
>
>
> So what do people do when they're using commercial libraries that aren't
> just jars? We use a commercial toolkit that comprises just under 5,000
> files, 40 of which are jar files. Right now, just so that I can use the
> Maven repo, I have to manually deploy each of those jar files to our
> internal repo, adding version numbers, creating group and artifact ids, etc.
> Then I have to package the other files up as a few zip files that I can
> download using the Maven dependency plugin, and deploy those to the repo as
> well. This is a painful manual process that needs to be repeated each time
> we get a new version from the vendor.
>
> Things might be simpler if the dependency plugin actually related to
> dependencies. ;-) What I mean is that, in theory, I could just drop the
> whole 3rd party toolkit into the repo as a zip file, use the dependency
> plugin to grap and explode it, and then reference the jar files in my POM.
> But doing that would require the use of system scope, because the dependency
> plugin doesn't actually add dependencies to your build. (Actually, I really
> don't understand why it's called the 'dependency' plugin, unless I've missed
> something quite fundamental about it. ;)
Really, I think this is one case where using system dependencies make
sense. But expect changes in the system dependencies. From what I have
red, Maven developpers think it is just a temporary patch for those
kind of problems.
>
> Since I can't imagine that using a commercial toolkit could be considered a
> "rare use case", I'm wondering if I'm missing something rather basic. What
> are other people doing in similar circumstances?
>
I think system dependencies makes sense there but I could be wrong.
> --
> Martin Cooper
>
>
> Wayne
> >
> > On 4/24/06, Kristian Nordal <kr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > > > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > > > checked out from the code repository?
> > >
> > >
> > > Take a look at the "system" scope:
> > >
> > http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-dependency-mechanism.html
> > >
> > > e.g:
> > > <dependency>
> > > <groupId>foo</groupId>
> > > <artifactId>foo</artifactId>
> > > <version>1.0.0</version>
> > > <scope>system</scope>
> > > <systemPath>${basedir}/foo/foo/1.0.0/foo-1.0.0.jar</systemPath>
> > > </dependency>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Cheers,
> > > Kristian
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Dependencies Options
Posted by Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com>.
On 4/25/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Since you're a paying customer, I'd ask your vendor to set up a Maven
> repo protected by HTTPS (or something similar to only allow valid
> customers to access it) that you can utilize. Put the onus back on
> them to handle the Maven repo with upgrading components etc.
>
> If this isn't realistic, I'd write a little Perl or Ruby script to
> accept a version number and a directory containing the jars, and make
> system calls to install each jar in turn into your corporate repo.
> When it has finished installing them, it could output a <dependencies>
> xml node that you can cut and paste into your project pom.xml files to
> pull in all the newly installed modules. (Someone actually sent a Ruby
> script to do the first half of this a few weeks ago, check the User
> list archive.)
>
> As for "dependency plugin does not add dependencies"... I'm wondering
> where that's coming from... If your third-party jars were "proper"
> Maven dependencies, they would each have a pom file describing their
> dependencies. So you could include in your pom a dependency on modA,
> which has deps on modB, modC; and modC has deps on modD and modE.
> Simply by adding the modA dep in your project's pom file, you would
> have modA-modE pulled in and used automatically as needed during
> compilation, testing, etc.
>
> Only because you are not creating proper poms for each module,
> declaring what specifically is dependent on what else etc, Maven
> cannot build a dependency tree to discover these transitive
> dependencies. So instead you have to declare every single module
> individually in your pom, I guess. This is not a fault of Maven,
> rather, it is a failure related to your current usage of the tool.
> (imho)
>
> We use some "commercial toolkit" jars as well, but check them into our
> Corporate repo, and just deal with it. Its not that big of a deal for
> us. The 1hr work of one person turns into hours saved not emailing
> jars around to all the various members of different development teams
> to make sure their project lib folders are up to date, dealing with
> large quantities of binary files checked into source control, etc. So
> for us it is an advantage.
>
Totally agree with you on this one. We did the same and it's worth it.
Save a lot of problems, especially when you want to distribute a new
version.
> Wayne
>
> On 4/25/06, Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On 4/24/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > It is *strongly* suggested that you do not utilize scope system. This
> > > is available for the rare use case which actually requires it.
> > >
> > > In general, you should add dependencies to your local repo (or a
> > > corporate repo, if you are using one) and use <dependency> in the
> > > normal manner.
> >
> >
> > So what do people do when they're using commercial libraries that aren't
> > just jars? We use a commercial toolkit that comprises just under 5,000
> > files, 40 of which are jar files. Right now, just so that I can use the
> > Maven repo, I have to manually deploy each of those jar files to our
> > internal repo, adding version numbers, creating group and artifact ids, etc.
> > Then I have to package the other files up as a few zip files that I can
> > download using the Maven dependency plugin, and deploy those to the repo as
> > well. This is a painful manual process that needs to be repeated each time
> > we get a new version from the vendor.
> >
> > Things might be simpler if the dependency plugin actually related to
> > dependencies. ;-) What I mean is that, in theory, I could just drop the
> > whole 3rd party toolkit into the repo as a zip file, use the dependency
> > plugin to grap and explode it, and then reference the jar files in my POM.
> > But doing that would require the use of system scope, because the dependency
> > plugin doesn't actually add dependencies to your build. (Actually, I really
> > don't understand why it's called the 'dependency' plugin, unless I've missed
> > something quite fundamental about it. ;)
> >
> > Since I can't imagine that using a commercial toolkit could be considered a
> > "rare use case", I'm wondering if I'm missing something rather basic. What
> > are other people doing in similar circumstances?
> >
> > --
> > Martin Cooper
> >
> >
> > Wayne
> > >
> > > On 4/24/06, Kristian Nordal <kr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > > > > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > > > > checked out from the code repository?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Take a look at the "system" scope:
> > > >
> > > http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-dependency-mechanism.html
> > > >
> > > > e.g:
> > > > <dependency>
> > > > <groupId>foo</groupId>
> > > > <artifactId>foo</artifactId>
> > > > <version>1.0.0</version>
> > > > <scope>system</scope>
> > > > <systemPath>${basedir}/foo/foo/1.0.0/foo-1.0.0.jar</systemPath>
> > > > </dependency>
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Kristian
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Dependencies Options
Posted by Gwyn <gw...@gmail.com>.
Martin Cooper-2 wrote:
>
> Yeah, that's where I figured I'd end up having to go. One thing that's a
> bit
> annoying on that front, though, is that I found that when I put a bunch of
> 'mvn foo' commands in a Windows batch file, only the first one executes,
> even if that first one is successful. ;-(
>
Yes, on Windows you need to "call" the mvn command to get control back.
Because of an issue with Maven & XDoclet, I can't use a parent pom.xml so
have the following build.bat...
cd Common && call mvn %1 %2 %3 %4 %5 && cd ..
cd Async && call mvn %1 %2 %3 %4 %5 && cd ..
cd Ejbs && call mvn %1 %2 %3 %4 %5 && cd ..
cd AdminWAR && call mvn %1 %2 %3 %4 %5 && cd ..
cd BonusWAR && call mvn %1 %2 %3 %4 %5 && cd ..
cd ConfigWAR && call mvn %1 %2 %3 %4 %5 && cd ..
/Gwyn
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Dependencies-Options-t1501725.html#a4091351
Sent from the Maven - Users forum at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Dependencies Options
Posted by dan tran <da...@gmail.com>.
Perhaps a name change request should be thru JIRA against MDEP?
-D
On 4/25/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 4/25/06, Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Sorry, that's not what I mean at all. I can use dependency:copy or
> > dependency:unpack to get artifacts from the repo, but as far as I can
> > determine, there is zero relationship between those artifacts and my
> build
> > dependencies. Certainly anything I obtain that way is not treated as a
> > dependency for build purposes. So I don't understand why they're in a
> plugin
> > called a 'dependency' plugin.
>
> You're right... Changing the plugin name to Artifact rather than
> Dependency might make more sense. ;-)
>
> Wayne
>
Re: Dependencies Options
Posted by Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com>.
On 4/25/06, Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> Sorry, that's not what I mean at all. I can use dependency:copy or
> dependency:unpack to get artifacts from the repo, but as far as I can
> determine, there is zero relationship between those artifacts and my build
> dependencies. Certainly anything I obtain that way is not treated as a
> dependency for build purposes. So I don't understand why they're in a plugin
> called a 'dependency' plugin.
You're right... Changing the plugin name to Artifact rather than
Dependency might make more sense. ;-)
Wayne
Re: Dependencies Options
Posted by Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org>.
On 4/25/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Since you're a paying customer, I'd ask your vendor to set up a Maven
> repo protected by HTTPS (or something similar to only allow valid
> customers to access it) that you can utilize. Put the onus back on
> them to handle the Maven repo with upgrading components etc.
I can try, but I won't hold my breath. ;-) In particular, there's no one way
that would make sense for all of their customers to partition the ~5,000
files that are not jars.
If this isn't realistic, I'd write a little Perl or Ruby script to
> accept a version number and a directory containing the jars, and make
> system calls to install each jar in turn into your corporate repo.
> When it has finished installing them, it could output a <dependencies>
> xml node that you can cut and paste into your project pom.xml files to
> pull in all the newly installed modules. (Someone actually sent a Ruby
> script to do the first half of this a few weeks ago, check the User
> list archive.)
Yeah, that's where I figured I'd end up having to go. One thing that's a bit
annoying on that front, though, is that I found that when I put a bunch of
'mvn foo' commands in a Windows batch file, only the first one executes,
even if that first one is successful. ;-(
As for "dependency plugin does not add dependencies"... I'm wondering
> where that's coming from... If your third-party jars were "proper"
> Maven dependencies, they would each have a pom file describing their
> dependencies. So you could include in your pom a dependency on modA,
> which has deps on modB, modC; and modC has deps on modD and modE.
> Simply by adding the modA dep in your project's pom file, you would
> have modA-modE pulled in and used automatically as needed during
> compilation, testing, etc.
Sorry, that's not what I mean at all. I can use dependency:copy or
dependency:unpack to get artifacts from the repo, but as far as I can
determine, there is zero relationship between those artifacts and my build
dependencies. Certainly anything I obtain that way is not treated as a
dependency for build purposes. So I don't understand why they're in a plugin
called a 'dependency' plugin.
I understand that the '-dependencies' versions of these goals are based on
declared dependencies, but that wasn't what I was referring to. Admittedly,
I wasn't clear about that. Sorry.
--
Martin Cooper
Only because you are not creating proper poms for each module,
> declaring what specifically is dependent on what else etc, Maven
> cannot build a dependency tree to discover these transitive
> dependencies. So instead you have to declare every single module
> individually in your pom, I guess. This is not a fault of Maven,
> rather, it is a failure related to your current usage of the tool.
> (imho)
>
> We use some "commercial toolkit" jars as well, but check them into our
> Corporate repo, and just deal with it. Its not that big of a deal for
> us. The 1hr work of one person turns into hours saved not emailing
> jars around to all the various members of different development teams
> to make sure their project lib folders are up to date, dealing with
> large quantities of binary files checked into source control, etc. So
> for us it is an advantage.
>
> Wayne
>
> On 4/25/06, Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On 4/24/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > It is *strongly* suggested that you do not utilize scope system. This
> > > is available for the rare use case which actually requires it.
> > >
> > > In general, you should add dependencies to your local repo (or a
> > > corporate repo, if you are using one) and use <dependency> in the
> > > normal manner.
> >
> >
> > So what do people do when they're using commercial libraries that aren't
> > just jars? We use a commercial toolkit that comprises just under 5,000
> > files, 40 of which are jar files. Right now, just so that I can use the
> > Maven repo, I have to manually deploy each of those jar files to our
> > internal repo, adding version numbers, creating group and artifact ids,
> etc.
> > Then I have to package the other files up as a few zip files that I can
> > download using the Maven dependency plugin, and deploy those to the repo
> as
> > well. This is a painful manual process that needs to be repeated each
> time
> > we get a new version from the vendor.
> >
> > Things might be simpler if the dependency plugin actually related to
> > dependencies. ;-) What I mean is that, in theory, I could just drop the
> > whole 3rd party toolkit into the repo as a zip file, use the dependency
> > plugin to grap and explode it, and then reference the jar files in my
> POM.
> > But doing that would require the use of system scope, because the
> dependency
> > plugin doesn't actually add dependencies to your build. (Actually, I
> really
> > don't understand why it's called the 'dependency' plugin, unless I've
> missed
> > something quite fundamental about it. ;)
> >
> > Since I can't imagine that using a commercial toolkit could be
> considered a
> > "rare use case", I'm wondering if I'm missing something rather basic.
> What
> > are other people doing in similar circumstances?
> >
> > --
> > Martin Cooper
> >
> >
> > Wayne
> > >
> > > On 4/24/06, Kristian Nordal <kr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > > > > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code
> when
> > > > > checked out from the code repository?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Take a look at the "system" scope:
> > > >
> > >
> http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-dependency-mechanism.html
> > > >
> > > > e.g:
> > > > <dependency>
> > > > <groupId>foo</groupId>
> > > > <artifactId>foo</artifactId>
> > > > <version>1.0.0</version>
> > > > <scope>system</scope>
> > > > <systemPath>${basedir}/foo/foo/1.0.0/foo-1.0.0.jar</systemPath>
> > > > </dependency>
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Kristian
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
Re: Dependencies Options
Posted by Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com>.
Since you're a paying customer, I'd ask your vendor to set up a Maven
repo protected by HTTPS (or something similar to only allow valid
customers to access it) that you can utilize. Put the onus back on
them to handle the Maven repo with upgrading components etc.
If this isn't realistic, I'd write a little Perl or Ruby script to
accept a version number and a directory containing the jars, and make
system calls to install each jar in turn into your corporate repo.
When it has finished installing them, it could output a <dependencies>
xml node that you can cut and paste into your project pom.xml files to
pull in all the newly installed modules. (Someone actually sent a Ruby
script to do the first half of this a few weeks ago, check the User
list archive.)
As for "dependency plugin does not add dependencies"... I'm wondering
where that's coming from... If your third-party jars were "proper"
Maven dependencies, they would each have a pom file describing their
dependencies. So you could include in your pom a dependency on modA,
which has deps on modB, modC; and modC has deps on modD and modE.
Simply by adding the modA dep in your project's pom file, you would
have modA-modE pulled in and used automatically as needed during
compilation, testing, etc.
Only because you are not creating proper poms for each module,
declaring what specifically is dependent on what else etc, Maven
cannot build a dependency tree to discover these transitive
dependencies. So instead you have to declare every single module
individually in your pom, I guess. This is not a fault of Maven,
rather, it is a failure related to your current usage of the tool.
(imho)
We use some "commercial toolkit" jars as well, but check them into our
Corporate repo, and just deal with it. Its not that big of a deal for
us. The 1hr work of one person turns into hours saved not emailing
jars around to all the various members of different development teams
to make sure their project lib folders are up to date, dealing with
large quantities of binary files checked into source control, etc. So
for us it is an advantage.
Wayne
On 4/25/06, Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 4/24/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > It is *strongly* suggested that you do not utilize scope system. This
> > is available for the rare use case which actually requires it.
> >
> > In general, you should add dependencies to your local repo (or a
> > corporate repo, if you are using one) and use <dependency> in the
> > normal manner.
>
>
> So what do people do when they're using commercial libraries that aren't
> just jars? We use a commercial toolkit that comprises just under 5,000
> files, 40 of which are jar files. Right now, just so that I can use the
> Maven repo, I have to manually deploy each of those jar files to our
> internal repo, adding version numbers, creating group and artifact ids, etc.
> Then I have to package the other files up as a few zip files that I can
> download using the Maven dependency plugin, and deploy those to the repo as
> well. This is a painful manual process that needs to be repeated each time
> we get a new version from the vendor.
>
> Things might be simpler if the dependency plugin actually related to
> dependencies. ;-) What I mean is that, in theory, I could just drop the
> whole 3rd party toolkit into the repo as a zip file, use the dependency
> plugin to grap and explode it, and then reference the jar files in my POM.
> But doing that would require the use of system scope, because the dependency
> plugin doesn't actually add dependencies to your build. (Actually, I really
> don't understand why it's called the 'dependency' plugin, unless I've missed
> something quite fundamental about it. ;)
>
> Since I can't imagine that using a commercial toolkit could be considered a
> "rare use case", I'm wondering if I'm missing something rather basic. What
> are other people doing in similar circumstances?
>
> --
> Martin Cooper
>
>
> Wayne
> >
> > On 4/24/06, Kristian Nordal <kr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > > > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > > > checked out from the code repository?
> > >
> > >
> > > Take a look at the "system" scope:
> > >
> > http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-dependency-mechanism.html
> > >
> > > e.g:
> > > <dependency>
> > > <groupId>foo</groupId>
> > > <artifactId>foo</artifactId>
> > > <version>1.0.0</version>
> > > <scope>system</scope>
> > > <systemPath>${basedir}/foo/foo/1.0.0/foo-1.0.0.jar</systemPath>
> > > </dependency>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Cheers,
> > > Kristian
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
Re: Dependencies Options
Posted by Martin Cooper <ma...@apache.org>.
On 4/24/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It is *strongly* suggested that you do not utilize scope system. This
> is available for the rare use case which actually requires it.
>
> In general, you should add dependencies to your local repo (or a
> corporate repo, if you are using one) and use <dependency> in the
> normal manner.
So what do people do when they're using commercial libraries that aren't
just jars? We use a commercial toolkit that comprises just under 5,000
files, 40 of which are jar files. Right now, just so that I can use the
Maven repo, I have to manually deploy each of those jar files to our
internal repo, adding version numbers, creating group and artifact ids, etc.
Then I have to package the other files up as a few zip files that I can
download using the Maven dependency plugin, and deploy those to the repo as
well. This is a painful manual process that needs to be repeated each time
we get a new version from the vendor.
Things might be simpler if the dependency plugin actually related to
dependencies. ;-) What I mean is that, in theory, I could just drop the
whole 3rd party toolkit into the repo as a zip file, use the dependency
plugin to grap and explode it, and then reference the jar files in my POM.
But doing that would require the use of system scope, because the dependency
plugin doesn't actually add dependencies to your build. (Actually, I really
don't understand why it's called the 'dependency' plugin, unless I've missed
something quite fundamental about it. ;)
Since I can't imagine that using a commercial toolkit could be considered a
"rare use case", I'm wondering if I'm missing something rather basic. What
are other people doing in similar circumstances?
--
Martin Cooper
Wayne
>
> On 4/24/06, Kristian Nordal <kr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > > checked out from the code repository?
> >
> >
> > Take a look at the "system" scope:
> >
> http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-dependency-mechanism.html
> >
> > e.g:
> > <dependency>
> > <groupId>foo</groupId>
> > <artifactId>foo</artifactId>
> > <version>1.0.0</version>
> > <scope>system</scope>
> > <systemPath>${basedir}/foo/foo/1.0.0/foo-1.0.0.jar</systemPath>
> > </dependency>
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> > Kristian
> >
> >
>
Re: Dependencies Options
Posted by Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com>.
It is *strongly* suggested that you do not utilize scope system. This
is available for the rare use case which actually requires it.
In general, you should add dependencies to your local repo (or a
corporate repo, if you are using one) and use <dependency> in the
normal manner.
Wayne
On 4/24/06, Kristian Nordal <kr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > checked out from the code repository?
>
>
> Take a look at the "system" scope:
> http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-dependency-mechanism.html
>
> e.g:
> <dependency>
> <groupId>foo</groupId>
> <artifactId>foo</artifactId>
> <version>1.0.0</version>
> <scope>system</scope>
> <systemPath>${basedir}/foo/foo/1.0.0/foo-1.0.0.jar</systemPath>
> </dependency>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Kristian
>
>
Re: Dependencies Options
Posted by Kristian Nordal <kr...@gmail.com>.
On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> checked out from the code repository?
Take a look at the "system" scope:
http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-dependency-mechanism.html
e.g:
<dependency>
<groupId>foo</groupId>
<artifactId>foo</artifactId>
<version>1.0.0</version>
<scope>system</scope>
<systemPath>${basedir}/foo/foo/1.0.0/foo-1.0.0.jar</systemPath>
</dependency>
--
Cheers,
Kristian
Re: Dependencies Options
Posted by Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com>.
Use "mvn install:install-file ..." to install those ejb3 files into
your local repository. Then use scope compile, test, or provided as
necessary.
This is documented on the Maven website:
http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-installing-3rd-party-jars.html
Wayne
On 4/25/06, Anshuman Srivastava <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If we do not use the "system" dependecies then how can we resolve the
> dependency on ejb3.0 which is not available on
> http://www.ibiblio.org/maven2/. This was my problem so i used ejb3 jars
> distributed by jboss.Is there any other way?
>
> pom.xml---
>
> <groupId>jboss.ejb3</groupId>
> <artifactId>ejb3-persistence</artifactId>
> <version>3.0</version>
> <scope>system</scope>
> <systemPath>C:/boss-4.0.4/server/default/deploy/ejb3.deployer/ejb3-
> persistence.jar</systemPath>
> </dependency>
> <dependency>
> <groupId>jboss.ejb3</groupId>
> <artifactId>ejb3-management</artifactId>
> <version>3.0</version>
> <scope>system</scope>
> <systemPath>C:/boss-4.0.4/docs/examples/jmx/ejb-management.jar
> </systemPath>
> </dependency>
> <dependency>
> <groupId>jboss-ejb3x</groupId>
> <artifactId>ejb3x</artifactId>
> <version>3.0</version>
> <scope>system</scope>
> <systemPath>C:/boss-4.0.4/server/default/deploy/ejb3.deployer/jboss-
> ejb3x.jar</systemPath>
> </dependency>
> <dependency>
> <groupId>jboss-annotations-ejb3</groupId>
> <artifactId>annotations-ejb3</artifactId>
> <version>3.0</version>
> <scope>system</scope>
> <systemPath>C:/boss-4.0.4/server/default/deploy/ejb3.deployer/jboss-
> annotations-ejb3.jar</systemPath>
> </dependency>
>
>
> On 4/25/06, Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Well you can use *system* dependencies but you loose tons of
> > advantages. Instead, maybe you should just populate your local
> > repository using the install plugin and -o to run mvn offline.
> >
> > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > > checked out from the code repository?
> > >
> > > Brandon
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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: Dependencies Options
Posted by Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com>.
Well using the Jboss jars is indeed the solution. The only thing I
would do is install it in my local repository using
install:install-file. But you have to know it won't work on other
desktop so usually you should have an internal corporation repository
and deploy them there. This each developper won't have to install them
manually. After that, you can work with those jar like they were
normal dependencies.
On 4/25/06, Anshuman Srivastava <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If we do not use the "system" dependecies then how can we resolve the
> dependency on ejb3.0 which is not available on
> http://www.ibiblio.org/maven2/. This was my problem so i used ejb3 jars
> distributed by jboss.Is there any other way?
>
> pom.xml---
>
> <groupId>jboss.ejb3</groupId>
> <artifactId>ejb3-persistence</artifactId>
> <version>3.0</version>
> <scope>system</scope>
> <systemPath>C:/boss-4.0.4/server/default/deploy/ejb3.deployer/ejb3-
> persistence.jar</systemPath>
> </dependency>
> <dependency>
> <groupId>jboss.ejb3</groupId>
> <artifactId>ejb3-management</artifactId>
> <version>3.0</version>
> <scope>system</scope>
> <systemPath>C:/boss-4.0.4/docs/examples/jmx/ejb-management.jar
> </systemPath>
> </dependency>
> <dependency>
> <groupId>jboss-ejb3x</groupId>
> <artifactId>ejb3x</artifactId>
> <version>3.0</version>
> <scope>system</scope>
> <systemPath>C:/boss-4.0.4/server/default/deploy/ejb3.deployer/jboss-
> ejb3x.jar</systemPath>
> </dependency>
> <dependency>
> <groupId>jboss-annotations-ejb3</groupId>
> <artifactId>annotations-ejb3</artifactId>
> <version>3.0</version>
> <scope>system</scope>
> <systemPath>C:/boss-4.0.4/server/default/deploy/ejb3.deployer/jboss-
> annotations-ejb3.jar</systemPath>
> </dependency>
>
>
> On 4/25/06, Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Well you can use *system* dependencies but you loose tons of
> > advantages. Instead, maybe you should just populate your local
> > repository using the install plugin and -o to run mvn offline.
> >
> > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > > checked out from the code repository?
> > >
> > > Brandon
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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
> >
> >
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Dependencies Options
Posted by Anshuman Srivastava <an...@gmail.com>.
If we do not use the "system" dependecies then how can we resolve the
dependency on ejb3.0 which is not available on
http://www.ibiblio.org/maven2/. This was my problem so i used ejb3 jars
distributed by jboss.Is there any other way?
pom.xml---
<groupId>jboss.ejb3</groupId>
<artifactId>ejb3-persistence</artifactId>
<version>3.0</version>
<scope>system</scope>
<systemPath>C:/boss-4.0.4/server/default/deploy/ejb3.deployer/ejb3-
persistence.jar</systemPath>
</dependency>
<dependency>
<groupId>jboss.ejb3</groupId>
<artifactId>ejb3-management</artifactId>
<version>3.0</version>
<scope>system</scope>
<systemPath>C:/boss-4.0.4/docs/examples/jmx/ejb-management.jar
</systemPath>
</dependency>
<dependency>
<groupId>jboss-ejb3x</groupId>
<artifactId>ejb3x</artifactId>
<version>3.0</version>
<scope>system</scope>
<systemPath>C:/boss-4.0.4/server/default/deploy/ejb3.deployer/jboss-
ejb3x.jar</systemPath>
</dependency>
<dependency>
<groupId>jboss-annotations-ejb3</groupId>
<artifactId>annotations-ejb3</artifactId>
<version>3.0</version>
<scope>system</scope>
<systemPath>C:/boss-4.0.4/server/default/deploy/ejb3.deployer/jboss-
annotations-ejb3.jar</systemPath>
</dependency>
On 4/25/06, Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Well you can use *system* dependencies but you loose tons of
> advantages. Instead, maybe you should just populate your local
> repository using the install plugin and -o to run mvn offline.
>
> On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > checked out from the code repository?
> >
> > Brandon
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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: Dependencies Options
Posted by Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com>.
On 4/24/06, Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "tons of advantages" - please quantify this.
>
> Well distributing internal corporation dependencies and managing the
> version, especially nightly build is way easier using Maven repository
> capabilities. Managing your project dependencies version is also
> really easier (especially conflicts and snapshots).
>
> All the Maven generated reports also work better with regular
> dependencies because they can find some metadatas to work with.
>
> >
> > Personally, I find the repository to be a "nice" piece of Maven. But,
> > I don't see it as a cardinal sin to actually distribute libraries in
> > your project. If you follow the libary naming convention then who
> > cares?
> >
> > Personally, what i find annoying are the copious additional, needless,
> > and redundant dependencies that i have to download because of the
> > dependencies defined in the pom of a jar that i need to download.
>
> Nothing the exclude tag can't fix.
>
> > I also find it annoying to have to manually install several small
> > libraries to my local repo cuz i can't distribute them as a result of
> > licensing. It is additionally annoying to have to setup a jar
> > repository that will be used for jars that will be needed that can
> > only be distributed privately. All of this... vs. me just referencing
> > them in my source tree?
> >
>
> You are making this sound like it is a lot of work. Manually
> installing files on a corporate repository using install:install-file
wanted to say deploy:deploy-file
> usually doesn't take more time then checking them inside SVN. A maven
> repository is basically a Jar versionning systems.
>
> > I like Maven a lot and really enjoy the standard project layout
> > features and plugins that are provided. But, the jar repository has
> > caused me more time and less efficiency. However, i do like ibiblio
> > for a single one stop shop for grabbing jars i need... to drop in my
> > source tree ;-)
> >
> > I like it when people can check out my source from SVN and simply
> > build. This is possible when i place them in SVN. Heck, I can even
> > check Sun Jars into my SVN repo! ;)
>
> If you have a remote Maven repository on the same server as your SVN
> repo, I really don't see the difference.
>
> >
> > Thanks to everyone for pointing me in the direction of the system.
> > I'll be using it. I'm always open to a compelling argument and a tap
> > on the forehead that helps me to see the light.
> >
> > Many Thanks,
> > Brandon
> >
> > On 4/24/06, Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Well you can use *system* dependencies but you loose tons of
> > > advantages. Instead, maybe you should just populate your local
> > > repository using the install plugin and -o to run mvn offline.
> > >
> > > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > > > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > > > checked out from the code repository?
> > > >
> > > > Brandon
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > 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
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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: Dependencies Options
Posted by Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com>.
On 4/25/06, Simon Kitching <sk...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 21:25 -0400, Alexandre Poitras wrote:
> > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > "tons of advantages" - please quantify this.
> >
> > Well distributing internal corporation dependencies and managing the
> > version, especially nightly build is way easier using Maven repository
> > capabilities. Managing your project dependencies version is also
> > really easier (especially conflicts and snapshots).
>
> I would disagree. Managing dependencies is really easy when you've
> checked jars into a directory - the jars used are the ones in that dir,
> and nothing else.
>
Well if you depend on a project developped concurrently (some common
component) and not a stable component, it is easier. Easy to upgrade
to a newer version and especially easy to get the new nightly builds
in the morning. Of course, this is doable using some other mechanism
but you have to it manually. Maven just see there are a fresh snapshot
available and download it. Well, from experience I have found it
easier but I guess it depends if Maven fit the way your corporation
work.
> Of course this does have the disadvantages listed in my mail (more repo
> space needed, more bandwidth).
>
> >
> > All the Maven generated reports also work better with regular
> > dependencies because they can find some metadatas to work with.
>
> true.
>
> >
> > >
> > > Personally, I find the repository to be a "nice" piece of Maven. But,
> > > I don't see it as a cardinal sin to actually distribute libraries in
> > > your project. If you follow the libary naming convention then who
> > > cares?
> > >
> > > Personally, what i find annoying are the copious additional, needless,
> > > and redundant dependencies that i have to download because of the
> > > dependencies defined in the pom of a jar that i need to download.
> >
> > Nothing the exclude tag can't fix.
>
> That can be quite clumsy to use, though. Sometimes half-a-dozen libs
> need to be excluded, at which point the pom becomes hard to read.
Yup but if it is the case it is usually because the original
dependency pom has some dependencies that should be declared optional.
Time to fill a JIRA issue.
Also, the key here is using a super pom so those settings are fixed
for all your projects, this is what I do with Spring and Hibernate and
it works very well. I don't have to declare all those exclude again
and again.
>
> >
> > > I also find it annoying to have to manually install several small
> > > libraries to my local repo cuz i can't distribute them as a result of
> > > licensing. It is additionally annoying to have to setup a jar
> > > repository that will be used for jars that will be needed that can
> > > only be distributed privately. All of this... vs. me just referencing
> > > them in my source tree?
> > >
> >
> > You are making this sound like it is a lot of work. Manually
> > installing files on a corporate repository using install:install-file
> > usually doesn't take more time then checking them inside SVN. A maven
> > repository is basically a Jar versionning systems.
>
> [as noted in your followup, you meant deploy:deploy-file]
>
> That's assuming that a corporate repo exists and that it has upload
> support available.
Yup but honestly I wouldn't use Maven without it because when you find
a bug on ibiblio you don't have to wait for your bug report to be
treated, you can fix it on internal corporation repository in the mean
time.
>
> >
> > > I like Maven a lot and really enjoy the standard project layout
> > > features and plugins that are provided. But, the jar repository has
> > > caused me more time and less efficiency. However, i do like ibiblio
> > > for a single one stop shop for grabbing jars i need... to drop in my
> > > source tree ;-)
> > >
> > > I like it when people can check out my source from SVN and simply
> > > build. This is possible when i place them in SVN. Heck, I can even
> > > check Sun Jars into my SVN repo! ;)
> >
> > If you have a remote Maven repository on the same server as your SVN
> > repo, I really don't see the difference.
>
> True, as long as:
> (a) your svn server is already running behind a webserver, so the maven
> repo can easily be set up,
> (b) there is some upload support for that server,
> (c) there is some way of ensuring that jars always come from this repo,
> and never from ibiblio (this is the hardest bit in my experience)
You're right except couple of things :
- a) Http is not mandatory, you can use ftp or sctp for instance.
- c) Well this is one is easy to fix, install Maven proxy on your
internal corporation repository. Now on your desktop, go in your
settings.xml and declare this repository as the only mirror of
central. You'll never go on ibiblio again, the proxy will if you have
configured it to do so. The only possible downside of this approach is
that your repository server needs acces to the Internet.
I understand inital difficulties using Maven repositories but once you
have an internal corporation repository coupled with Maven-proxy,
things get better. Well right now Maven-proxy is not the best tool but
it does work. A newer version is coming shipped in Maven repository
tools or something like that, I don't remember the name but it looks
promising. Can't wait to see the result.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Simon
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Dependencies Options
Posted by Simon Kitching <sk...@apache.org>.
On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 21:25 -0400, Alexandre Poitras wrote:
> On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "tons of advantages" - please quantify this.
>
> Well distributing internal corporation dependencies and managing the
> version, especially nightly build is way easier using Maven repository
> capabilities. Managing your project dependencies version is also
> really easier (especially conflicts and snapshots).
I would disagree. Managing dependencies is really easy when you've
checked jars into a directory - the jars used are the ones in that dir,
and nothing else.
Of course this does have the disadvantages listed in my mail (more repo
space needed, more bandwidth).
>
> All the Maven generated reports also work better with regular
> dependencies because they can find some metadatas to work with.
true.
>
> >
> > Personally, I find the repository to be a "nice" piece of Maven. But,
> > I don't see it as a cardinal sin to actually distribute libraries in
> > your project. If you follow the libary naming convention then who
> > cares?
> >
> > Personally, what i find annoying are the copious additional, needless,
> > and redundant dependencies that i have to download because of the
> > dependencies defined in the pom of a jar that i need to download.
>
> Nothing the exclude tag can't fix.
That can be quite clumsy to use, though. Sometimes half-a-dozen libs
need to be excluded, at which point the pom becomes hard to read.
>
> > I also find it annoying to have to manually install several small
> > libraries to my local repo cuz i can't distribute them as a result of
> > licensing. It is additionally annoying to have to setup a jar
> > repository that will be used for jars that will be needed that can
> > only be distributed privately. All of this... vs. me just referencing
> > them in my source tree?
> >
>
> You are making this sound like it is a lot of work. Manually
> installing files on a corporate repository using install:install-file
> usually doesn't take more time then checking them inside SVN. A maven
> repository is basically a Jar versionning systems.
[as noted in your followup, you meant deploy:deploy-file]
That's assuming that a corporate repo exists and that it has upload
support available.
>
> > I like Maven a lot and really enjoy the standard project layout
> > features and plugins that are provided. But, the jar repository has
> > caused me more time and less efficiency. However, i do like ibiblio
> > for a single one stop shop for grabbing jars i need... to drop in my
> > source tree ;-)
> >
> > I like it when people can check out my source from SVN and simply
> > build. This is possible when i place them in SVN. Heck, I can even
> > check Sun Jars into my SVN repo! ;)
>
> If you have a remote Maven repository on the same server as your SVN
> repo, I really don't see the difference.
True, as long as:
(a) your svn server is already running behind a webserver, so the maven
repo can easily be set up,
(b) there is some upload support for that server,
(c) there is some way of ensuring that jars always come from this repo,
and never from ibiblio (this is the hardest bit in my experience)
Cheers,
Simon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Dependencies Options
Posted by Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com>.
On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "tons of advantages" - please quantify this.
Well distributing internal corporation dependencies and managing the
version, especially nightly build is way easier using Maven repository
capabilities. Managing your project dependencies version is also
really easier (especially conflicts and snapshots).
All the Maven generated reports also work better with regular
dependencies because they can find some metadatas to work with.
>
> Personally, I find the repository to be a "nice" piece of Maven. But,
> I don't see it as a cardinal sin to actually distribute libraries in
> your project. If you follow the libary naming convention then who
> cares?
>
> Personally, what i find annoying are the copious additional, needless,
> and redundant dependencies that i have to download because of the
> dependencies defined in the pom of a jar that i need to download.
Nothing the exclude tag can't fix.
> I also find it annoying to have to manually install several small
> libraries to my local repo cuz i can't distribute them as a result of
> licensing. It is additionally annoying to have to setup a jar
> repository that will be used for jars that will be needed that can
> only be distributed privately. All of this... vs. me just referencing
> them in my source tree?
>
You are making this sound like it is a lot of work. Manually
installing files on a corporate repository using install:install-file
usually doesn't take more time then checking them inside SVN. A maven
repository is basically a Jar versionning systems.
> I like Maven a lot and really enjoy the standard project layout
> features and plugins that are provided. But, the jar repository has
> caused me more time and less efficiency. However, i do like ibiblio
> for a single one stop shop for grabbing jars i need... to drop in my
> source tree ;-)
>
> I like it when people can check out my source from SVN and simply
> build. This is possible when i place them in SVN. Heck, I can even
> check Sun Jars into my SVN repo! ;)
If you have a remote Maven repository on the same server as your SVN
repo, I really don't see the difference.
>
> Thanks to everyone for pointing me in the direction of the system.
> I'll be using it. I'm always open to a compelling argument and a tap
> on the forehead that helps me to see the light.
>
> Many Thanks,
> Brandon
>
> On 4/24/06, Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Well you can use *system* dependencies but you loose tons of
> > advantages. Instead, maybe you should just populate your local
> > repository using the install plugin and -o to run mvn offline.
> >
> > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > > checked out from the code repository?
> > >
> > > Brandon
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Dependencies Options
Posted by Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com>.
The sun jars were a minor point. You still didn't answer the larger context.
Brandon
On 4/24/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Checking Sun Jars into your repo is a violation of the Sun Binary
> Compatibility License which you agreed to when you downloaded the
> file. (Assuming the file was downloaded from Sun under the Sun BCL
> terms, which most files on Sun.com require you to accept prior to
> downloading.)
>
> I doubt Sun will chase you down and prosecute you, but realize that
> some of us actually care about respecting intellectual property and
> license requirements. Complaining about the way these Sun Jars are
> handled to the Maven User list is really the wrong place -- complain
> directly to Sun, ask them to modify the distribution terms of their
> licenses, etc.
>
> Wayne
>
> On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "tons of advantages" - please quantify this.
> >
> > Personally, I find the repository to be a "nice" piece of Maven. But,
> > I don't see it as a cardinal sin to actually distribute libraries in
> > your project. If you follow the libary naming convention then who
> > cares?
> >
> > Personally, what i find annoying are the copious additional, needless,
> > and redundant dependencies that i have to download because of the
> > dependencies defined in the pom of a jar that i need to download. I
> > also find it annoying to have to manually install several small
> > libraries to my local repo cuz i can't distribute them as a result of
> > licensing. It is additionally annoying to have to setup a jar
> > repository that will be used for jars that will be needed that can
> > only be distributed privately. All of this... vs. me just referencing
> > them in my source tree?
> >
> > I like Maven a lot and really enjoy the standard project layout
> > features and plugins that are provided. But, the jar repository has
> > caused me more time and less efficiency. However, i do like ibiblio
> > for a single one stop shop for grabbing jars i need... to drop in my
> > source tree ;-)
> >
> > I like it when people can check out my source from SVN and simply
> > build. This is possible when i place them in SVN. Heck, I can even
> > check Sun Jars into my SVN repo! ;)
> >
> > Thanks to everyone for pointing me in the direction of the system.
> > I'll be using it. I'm always open to a compelling argument and a tap
> > on the forehead that helps me to see the light.
> >
> > Many Thanks,
> > Brandon
> >
> > On 4/24/06, Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Well you can use *system* dependencies but you loose tons of
> > > advantages. Instead, maybe you should just populate your local
> > > repository using the install plugin and -o to run mvn offline.
> > >
> > > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > > > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > > > checked out from the code repository?
> > > >
> > > > Brandon
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > 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
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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: Dependencies Options
Posted by Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com>.
No worries, Brandon. I have to run now but I'll be happy to continue
the discussion later tonight... ;-)
Wayne
On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Wayne, I'm sorry if my email tone sounds aggressive... i really am
> not trying to come off that way. So please accept my comments purely
> as an exercise in conversation.
>
> I totally understand the intellectual property that rights that Sun
> attaches to their jars. I fully respect them. I'm just trying to
> understand why so much emphasis is placed on the centralized jar repo.
> There were plenty of other concerns besides the sun jars that i cited.
> I'm just speaking more from my needs. The repo is cool. But, I see an
> equally acceptable approach of having jars that you check into your
> source code repo. I guess I'm trying more to understand why there is
> such an emphasis on central repo over simply presenting the ability to
> use either/or.
>
> As an additional note, the centralized repo is only as good as those
> willing to post to it. I've run into the problem that the latest and
> greatest are not always on ibiblio. I've also ran into the problem
> that there are sometimes version gaps. Also, I've seen where there are
> the same jars under different (but similar) group ids. I know i can
> setup a local repo for jars. But, then i find myself wondering why.
> Especially when i already have a versioning repository... SVN.
>
> Many thanks for your time and responses,
> Brandon
>
>
>
> On 4/24/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > That should be "Checking Sun Jars into your SVN repo". Obviously
> > anyone is allowed to download the Sun Jars and install them into their
> > own local Maven repo, or anything else permitted under the Sun BCL
> > terms.
> >
> > Checking the jars into a publicly available distribution service ie
> > Sourceforge CVS/SVN etc is unfortunately not allowed by Sun's
> > licensing.
> >
> > You can go to Sun.com and read the specifics of the BCL if you want,
> > to see what specifically is permitted and what is not.
> >
> > Wayne
> >
> > On 4/24/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Checking Sun Jars into your repo is a violation of the Sun Binary
> > > Compatibility License which you agreed to when you downloaded the
> > > file. (Assuming the file was downloaded from Sun under the Sun BCL
> > > terms, which most files on Sun.com require you to accept prior to
> > > downloading.)
> > >
> > > I doubt Sun will chase you down and prosecute you, but realize that
> > > some of us actually care about respecting intellectual property and
> > > license requirements. Complaining about the way these Sun Jars are
> > > handled to the Maven User list is really the wrong place -- complain
> > > directly to Sun, ask them to modify the distribution terms of their
> > > licenses, etc.
> > >
> > > Wayne
> > >
> > > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > "tons of advantages" - please quantify this.
> > > >
> > > > Personally, I find the repository to be a "nice" piece of Maven. But,
> > > > I don't see it as a cardinal sin to actually distribute libraries in
> > > > your project. If you follow the libary naming convention then who
> > > > cares?
> > > >
> > > > Personally, what i find annoying are the copious additional, needless,
> > > > and redundant dependencies that i have to download because of the
> > > > dependencies defined in the pom of a jar that i need to download. I
> > > > also find it annoying to have to manually install several small
> > > > libraries to my local repo cuz i can't distribute them as a result of
> > > > licensing. It is additionally annoying to have to setup a jar
> > > > repository that will be used for jars that will be needed that can
> > > > only be distributed privately. All of this... vs. me just referencing
> > > > them in my source tree?
> > > >
> > > > I like Maven a lot and really enjoy the standard project layout
> > > > features and plugins that are provided. But, the jar repository has
> > > > caused me more time and less efficiency. However, i do like ibiblio
> > > > for a single one stop shop for grabbing jars i need... to drop in my
> > > > source tree ;-)
> > > >
> > > > I like it when people can check out my source from SVN and simply
> > > > build. This is possible when i place them in SVN. Heck, I can even
> > > > check Sun Jars into my SVN repo! ;)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks to everyone for pointing me in the direction of the system.
> > > > I'll be using it. I'm always open to a compelling argument and a tap
> > > > on the forehead that helps me to see the light.
> > > >
> > > > Many Thanks,
> > > > Brandon
> > > >
> > > > On 4/24/06, Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Well you can use *system* dependencies but you loose tons of
> > > > > advantages. Instead, maybe you should just populate your local
> > > > > repository using the install plugin and -o to run mvn offline.
> > > > >
> > > > > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > > > > > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > > > > > checked out from the code repository?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Brandon
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > 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: Dependencies Options
Posted by Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com>.
Just one more thing I dislike about system dependencies I wanted to
specify. A good practice is usually to do a complete project check out
after a check in. Takes a lot of times when you have several jars
bundled with your projects.
On 4/24/06, Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/24/06, Simon Kitching <sk...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I agree with much of what Brandon is saying.
> >
> > For *open source* projects, Maven's repository is really useful; the
> > minor inconveniences are worth living with. In particular, such projects
> > need to conserve disk space and network bandwidth; checking in jars for
> > each project is therefore a bad idea. Brandon: imagine if Apache
> > projects used the "check jars in with project" approach; the disk space
> > needed would multiply 100-fold, with the same jar checked in multiple
> > times under different projects. It also means that those files are all
> > downloaded from the apache site, not ibiblio. And it means that users
> > (who may be on dialup connections) end up downloading the same jars
> > multiple times even when they already have those jars on their local PC.
> >
> > For *internal* projects, however, having local jars can be very useful.
> > Bandwidth is less of an issue; simplicity and reproducable builds are
> > more important. And as several people have noted on this list (and I've
> > found from experience too) preventing maven from fetching stuff from
> > repositories beyond your control is currently *really hard*.
> >
>
> Have you ever used the dependency exclude element? Or run Maven using
> the offline switch ("-o")?
>
> > I think it would be really nice if repositories could have a
> > <remote>false</remote> tag; a "non-remote" repo (using any access
> > protocol) would be used when offline mode is used. People could then
> > check a complete maven repository into their project if they wish, and
> > use a repository declaration with url "file://...", remote set to false,
> > and offline set to true.
>
> This is already doable "mvn -o". You just don't get the jar bundled
> with your project. This is the assembly plugin job. But I really don't
> get what you are trying to achieve. What is the difference between a
> internal corporation Maven repository and a internal corporation SVN
> repository setup on the same server? Nothing except Maven repository
> is better at handling dependencies then SVN.
>
> > This wouldn't be recommended for sites that
> > host large numbers of projects, as disk-space and bandwidth issues would
> > cause problems, but it's then easy to set up self-contained builds for
> > smaller sites. It's not *quite* as simple to use as simply checking in a
> > directory of jars and pointing to that dir, but it's close - while still
> > supporting much of maven's standard dependency support. Hmm..could the
> > same effect be achieved by checking in an "settings.xml" with
> > localRepository pointing to a checked-in dir, and running maven with
> > "mvn -s ./settings.xml"?
> >
> > Brandon: Note that when using <scope>system</scope>, transitive
> > dependencies aren't supported. It's really meant only for pointing at
> > files like "rt.jar" from a locally-installed jdk. That doesn't mean you
> > can't use it for the purpose you want, but that's not its intent.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Simon
> >
> > On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 16:13 -0600, Brandon Goodin wrote:
> > > Hey Wayne, I'm sorry if my email tone sounds aggressive... i really am
> > > not trying to come off that way. So please accept my comments purely
> > > as an exercise in conversation.
> > >
> > > I totally understand the intellectual property that rights that Sun
> > > attaches to their jars. I fully respect them. I'm just trying to
> > > understand why so much emphasis is placed on the centralized jar repo.
> > > There were plenty of other concerns besides the sun jars that i cited.
> > > I'm just speaking more from my needs. The repo is cool. But, I see an
> > > equally acceptable approach of having jars that you check into your
> > > source code repo. I guess I'm trying more to understand why there is
> > > such an emphasis on central repo over simply presenting the ability to
> > > use either/or.
> > >
> > > As an additional note, the centralized repo is only as good as those
> > > willing to post to it. I've run into the problem that the latest and
> > > greatest are not always on ibiblio. I've also ran into the problem
> > > that there are sometimes version gaps. Also, I've seen where there are
> > > the same jars under different (but similar) group ids. I know i can
> > > setup a local repo for jars. But, then i find myself wondering why.
> > > Especially when i already have a versioning repository... SVN.
> > >
> > > Many thanks for your time and responses,
> > > Brandon
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 4/24/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > That should be "Checking Sun Jars into your SVN repo". Obviously
> > > > anyone is allowed to download the Sun Jars and install them into their
> > > > own local Maven repo, or anything else permitted under the Sun BCL
> > > > terms.
> > > >
> > > > Checking the jars into a publicly available distribution service ie
> > > > Sourceforge CVS/SVN etc is unfortunately not allowed by Sun's
> > > > licensing.
> > > >
> > > > You can go to Sun.com and read the specifics of the BCL if you want,
> > > > to see what specifically is permitted and what is not.
> > > >
> > > > Wayne
> > > >
> > > > On 4/24/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Checking Sun Jars into your repo is a violation of the Sun Binary
> > > > > Compatibility License which you agreed to when you downloaded the
> > > > > file. (Assuming the file was downloaded from Sun under the Sun BCL
> > > > > terms, which most files on Sun.com require you to accept prior to
> > > > > downloading.)
> > > > >
> > > > > I doubt Sun will chase you down and prosecute you, but realize that
> > > > > some of us actually care about respecting intellectual property and
> > > > > license requirements. Complaining about the way these Sun Jars are
> > > > > handled to the Maven User list is really the wrong place -- complain
> > > > > directly to Sun, ask them to modify the distribution terms of their
> > > > > licenses, etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > Wayne
> > > > >
> > > > > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > "tons of advantages" - please quantify this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Personally, I find the repository to be a "nice" piece of Maven. But,
> > > > > > I don't see it as a cardinal sin to actually distribute libraries in
> > > > > > your project. If you follow the libary naming convention then who
> > > > > > cares?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Personally, what i find annoying are the copious additional, needless,
> > > > > > and redundant dependencies that i have to download because of the
> > > > > > dependencies defined in the pom of a jar that i need to download. I
> > > > > > also find it annoying to have to manually install several small
> > > > > > libraries to my local repo cuz i can't distribute them as a result of
> > > > > > licensing. It is additionally annoying to have to setup a jar
> > > > > > repository that will be used for jars that will be needed that can
> > > > > > only be distributed privately. All of this... vs. me just referencing
> > > > > > them in my source tree?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I like Maven a lot and really enjoy the standard project layout
> > > > > > features and plugins that are provided. But, the jar repository has
> > > > > > caused me more time and less efficiency. However, i do like ibiblio
> > > > > > for a single one stop shop for grabbing jars i need... to drop in my
> > > > > > source tree ;-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I like it when people can check out my source from SVN and simply
> > > > > > build. This is possible when i place them in SVN. Heck, I can even
> > > > > > check Sun Jars into my SVN repo! ;)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks to everyone for pointing me in the direction of the system.
> > > > > > I'll be using it. I'm always open to a compelling argument and a tap
> > > > > > on the forehead that helps me to see the light.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Many Thanks,
> > > > > > Brandon
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 4/24/06, Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Well you can use *system* dependencies but you loose tons of
> > > > > > > advantages. Instead, maybe you should just populate your local
> > > > > > > repository using the install plugin and -o to run mvn offline.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > > > > > > > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > > > > > > > checked out from the code repository?
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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: Dependencies Options
Posted by Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com>.
On 4/24/06, Simon Kitching <sk...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I agree with much of what Brandon is saying.
>
> For *open source* projects, Maven's repository is really useful; the
> minor inconveniences are worth living with. In particular, such projects
> need to conserve disk space and network bandwidth; checking in jars for
> each project is therefore a bad idea. Brandon: imagine if Apache
> projects used the "check jars in with project" approach; the disk space
> needed would multiply 100-fold, with the same jar checked in multiple
> times under different projects. It also means that those files are all
> downloaded from the apache site, not ibiblio. And it means that users
> (who may be on dialup connections) end up downloading the same jars
> multiple times even when they already have those jars on their local PC.
>
> For *internal* projects, however, having local jars can be very useful.
> Bandwidth is less of an issue; simplicity and reproducable builds are
> more important. And as several people have noted on this list (and I've
> found from experience too) preventing maven from fetching stuff from
> repositories beyond your control is currently *really hard*.
>
Have you ever used the dependency exclude element? Or run Maven using
the offline switch ("-o")?
> I think it would be really nice if repositories could have a
> <remote>false</remote> tag; a "non-remote" repo (using any access
> protocol) would be used when offline mode is used. People could then
> check a complete maven repository into their project if they wish, and
> use a repository declaration with url "file://...", remote set to false,
> and offline set to true.
This is already doable "mvn -o". You just don't get the jar bundled
with your project. This is the assembly plugin job. But I really don't
get what you are trying to achieve. What is the difference between a
internal corporation Maven repository and a internal corporation SVN
repository setup on the same server? Nothing except Maven repository
is better at handling dependencies then SVN.
> This wouldn't be recommended for sites that
> host large numbers of projects, as disk-space and bandwidth issues would
> cause problems, but it's then easy to set up self-contained builds for
> smaller sites. It's not *quite* as simple to use as simply checking in a
> directory of jars and pointing to that dir, but it's close - while still
> supporting much of maven's standard dependency support. Hmm..could the
> same effect be achieved by checking in an "settings.xml" with
> localRepository pointing to a checked-in dir, and running maven with
> "mvn -s ./settings.xml"?
>
> Brandon: Note that when using <scope>system</scope>, transitive
> dependencies aren't supported. It's really meant only for pointing at
> files like "rt.jar" from a locally-installed jdk. That doesn't mean you
> can't use it for the purpose you want, but that's not its intent.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Simon
>
> On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 16:13 -0600, Brandon Goodin wrote:
> > Hey Wayne, I'm sorry if my email tone sounds aggressive... i really am
> > not trying to come off that way. So please accept my comments purely
> > as an exercise in conversation.
> >
> > I totally understand the intellectual property that rights that Sun
> > attaches to their jars. I fully respect them. I'm just trying to
> > understand why so much emphasis is placed on the centralized jar repo.
> > There were plenty of other concerns besides the sun jars that i cited.
> > I'm just speaking more from my needs. The repo is cool. But, I see an
> > equally acceptable approach of having jars that you check into your
> > source code repo. I guess I'm trying more to understand why there is
> > such an emphasis on central repo over simply presenting the ability to
> > use either/or.
> >
> > As an additional note, the centralized repo is only as good as those
> > willing to post to it. I've run into the problem that the latest and
> > greatest are not always on ibiblio. I've also ran into the problem
> > that there are sometimes version gaps. Also, I've seen where there are
> > the same jars under different (but similar) group ids. I know i can
> > setup a local repo for jars. But, then i find myself wondering why.
> > Especially when i already have a versioning repository... SVN.
> >
> > Many thanks for your time and responses,
> > Brandon
> >
> >
> >
> > On 4/24/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > That should be "Checking Sun Jars into your SVN repo". Obviously
> > > anyone is allowed to download the Sun Jars and install them into their
> > > own local Maven repo, or anything else permitted under the Sun BCL
> > > terms.
> > >
> > > Checking the jars into a publicly available distribution service ie
> > > Sourceforge CVS/SVN etc is unfortunately not allowed by Sun's
> > > licensing.
> > >
> > > You can go to Sun.com and read the specifics of the BCL if you want,
> > > to see what specifically is permitted and what is not.
> > >
> > > Wayne
> > >
> > > On 4/24/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Checking Sun Jars into your repo is a violation of the Sun Binary
> > > > Compatibility License which you agreed to when you downloaded the
> > > > file. (Assuming the file was downloaded from Sun under the Sun BCL
> > > > terms, which most files on Sun.com require you to accept prior to
> > > > downloading.)
> > > >
> > > > I doubt Sun will chase you down and prosecute you, but realize that
> > > > some of us actually care about respecting intellectual property and
> > > > license requirements. Complaining about the way these Sun Jars are
> > > > handled to the Maven User list is really the wrong place -- complain
> > > > directly to Sun, ask them to modify the distribution terms of their
> > > > licenses, etc.
> > > >
> > > > Wayne
> > > >
> > > > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > "tons of advantages" - please quantify this.
> > > > >
> > > > > Personally, I find the repository to be a "nice" piece of Maven. But,
> > > > > I don't see it as a cardinal sin to actually distribute libraries in
> > > > > your project. If you follow the libary naming convention then who
> > > > > cares?
> > > > >
> > > > > Personally, what i find annoying are the copious additional, needless,
> > > > > and redundant dependencies that i have to download because of the
> > > > > dependencies defined in the pom of a jar that i need to download. I
> > > > > also find it annoying to have to manually install several small
> > > > > libraries to my local repo cuz i can't distribute them as a result of
> > > > > licensing. It is additionally annoying to have to setup a jar
> > > > > repository that will be used for jars that will be needed that can
> > > > > only be distributed privately. All of this... vs. me just referencing
> > > > > them in my source tree?
> > > > >
> > > > > I like Maven a lot and really enjoy the standard project layout
> > > > > features and plugins that are provided. But, the jar repository has
> > > > > caused me more time and less efficiency. However, i do like ibiblio
> > > > > for a single one stop shop for grabbing jars i need... to drop in my
> > > > > source tree ;-)
> > > > >
> > > > > I like it when people can check out my source from SVN and simply
> > > > > build. This is possible when i place them in SVN. Heck, I can even
> > > > > check Sun Jars into my SVN repo! ;)
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks to everyone for pointing me in the direction of the system.
> > > > > I'll be using it. I'm always open to a compelling argument and a tap
> > > > > on the forehead that helps me to see the light.
> > > > >
> > > > > Many Thanks,
> > > > > Brandon
> > > > >
> > > > > On 4/24/06, Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Well you can use *system* dependencies but you loose tons of
> > > > > > advantages. Instead, maybe you should just populate your local
> > > > > > repository using the install plugin and -o to run mvn offline.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > > > > > > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > > > > > > checked out from the code repository?
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Dependencies Options
Posted by Simon Kitching <sk...@apache.org>.
Hi,
I agree with much of what Brandon is saying.
For *open source* projects, Maven's repository is really useful; the
minor inconveniences are worth living with. In particular, such projects
need to conserve disk space and network bandwidth; checking in jars for
each project is therefore a bad idea. Brandon: imagine if Apache
projects used the "check jars in with project" approach; the disk space
needed would multiply 100-fold, with the same jar checked in multiple
times under different projects. It also means that those files are all
downloaded from the apache site, not ibiblio. And it means that users
(who may be on dialup connections) end up downloading the same jars
multiple times even when they already have those jars on their local PC.
For *internal* projects, however, having local jars can be very useful.
Bandwidth is less of an issue; simplicity and reproducable builds are
more important. And as several people have noted on this list (and I've
found from experience too) preventing maven from fetching stuff from
repositories beyond your control is currently *really hard*.
I think it would be really nice if repositories could have a
<remote>false</remote> tag; a "non-remote" repo (using any access
protocol) would be used when offline mode is used. People could then
check a complete maven repository into their project if they wish, and
use a repository declaration with url "file://...", remote set to false,
and offline set to true. This wouldn't be recommended for sites that
host large numbers of projects, as disk-space and bandwidth issues would
cause problems, but it's then easy to set up self-contained builds for
smaller sites. It's not *quite* as simple to use as simply checking in a
directory of jars and pointing to that dir, but it's close - while still
supporting much of maven's standard dependency support. Hmm..could the
same effect be achieved by checking in an "settings.xml" with
localRepository pointing to a checked-in dir, and running maven with
"mvn -s ./settings.xml"?
Brandon: Note that when using <scope>system</scope>, transitive
dependencies aren't supported. It's really meant only for pointing at
files like "rt.jar" from a locally-installed jdk. That doesn't mean you
can't use it for the purpose you want, but that's not its intent.
Cheers,
Simon
On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 16:13 -0600, Brandon Goodin wrote:
> Hey Wayne, I'm sorry if my email tone sounds aggressive... i really am
> not trying to come off that way. So please accept my comments purely
> as an exercise in conversation.
>
> I totally understand the intellectual property that rights that Sun
> attaches to their jars. I fully respect them. I'm just trying to
> understand why so much emphasis is placed on the centralized jar repo.
> There were plenty of other concerns besides the sun jars that i cited.
> I'm just speaking more from my needs. The repo is cool. But, I see an
> equally acceptable approach of having jars that you check into your
> source code repo. I guess I'm trying more to understand why there is
> such an emphasis on central repo over simply presenting the ability to
> use either/or.
>
> As an additional note, the centralized repo is only as good as those
> willing to post to it. I've run into the problem that the latest and
> greatest are not always on ibiblio. I've also ran into the problem
> that there are sometimes version gaps. Also, I've seen where there are
> the same jars under different (but similar) group ids. I know i can
> setup a local repo for jars. But, then i find myself wondering why.
> Especially when i already have a versioning repository... SVN.
>
> Many thanks for your time and responses,
> Brandon
>
>
>
> On 4/24/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > That should be "Checking Sun Jars into your SVN repo". Obviously
> > anyone is allowed to download the Sun Jars and install them into their
> > own local Maven repo, or anything else permitted under the Sun BCL
> > terms.
> >
> > Checking the jars into a publicly available distribution service ie
> > Sourceforge CVS/SVN etc is unfortunately not allowed by Sun's
> > licensing.
> >
> > You can go to Sun.com and read the specifics of the BCL if you want,
> > to see what specifically is permitted and what is not.
> >
> > Wayne
> >
> > On 4/24/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Checking Sun Jars into your repo is a violation of the Sun Binary
> > > Compatibility License which you agreed to when you downloaded the
> > > file. (Assuming the file was downloaded from Sun under the Sun BCL
> > > terms, which most files on Sun.com require you to accept prior to
> > > downloading.)
> > >
> > > I doubt Sun will chase you down and prosecute you, but realize that
> > > some of us actually care about respecting intellectual property and
> > > license requirements. Complaining about the way these Sun Jars are
> > > handled to the Maven User list is really the wrong place -- complain
> > > directly to Sun, ask them to modify the distribution terms of their
> > > licenses, etc.
> > >
> > > Wayne
> > >
> > > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > "tons of advantages" - please quantify this.
> > > >
> > > > Personally, I find the repository to be a "nice" piece of Maven. But,
> > > > I don't see it as a cardinal sin to actually distribute libraries in
> > > > your project. If you follow the libary naming convention then who
> > > > cares?
> > > >
> > > > Personally, what i find annoying are the copious additional, needless,
> > > > and redundant dependencies that i have to download because of the
> > > > dependencies defined in the pom of a jar that i need to download. I
> > > > also find it annoying to have to manually install several small
> > > > libraries to my local repo cuz i can't distribute them as a result of
> > > > licensing. It is additionally annoying to have to setup a jar
> > > > repository that will be used for jars that will be needed that can
> > > > only be distributed privately. All of this... vs. me just referencing
> > > > them in my source tree?
> > > >
> > > > I like Maven a lot and really enjoy the standard project layout
> > > > features and plugins that are provided. But, the jar repository has
> > > > caused me more time and less efficiency. However, i do like ibiblio
> > > > for a single one stop shop for grabbing jars i need... to drop in my
> > > > source tree ;-)
> > > >
> > > > I like it when people can check out my source from SVN and simply
> > > > build. This is possible when i place them in SVN. Heck, I can even
> > > > check Sun Jars into my SVN repo! ;)
> > > >
> > > > Thanks to everyone for pointing me in the direction of the system.
> > > > I'll be using it. I'm always open to a compelling argument and a tap
> > > > on the forehead that helps me to see the light.
> > > >
> > > > Many Thanks,
> > > > Brandon
> > > >
> > > > On 4/24/06, Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Well you can use *system* dependencies but you loose tons of
> > > > > advantages. Instead, maybe you should just populate your local
> > > > > repository using the install plugin and -o to run mvn offline.
> > > > >
> > > > > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > > > > > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > > > > > checked out from the code repository?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Dependencies Options
Posted by Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com>.
Hey Wayne, I'm sorry if my email tone sounds aggressive... i really am
not trying to come off that way. So please accept my comments purely
as an exercise in conversation.
I totally understand the intellectual property that rights that Sun
attaches to their jars. I fully respect them. I'm just trying to
understand why so much emphasis is placed on the centralized jar repo.
There were plenty of other concerns besides the sun jars that i cited.
I'm just speaking more from my needs. The repo is cool. But, I see an
equally acceptable approach of having jars that you check into your
source code repo. I guess I'm trying more to understand why there is
such an emphasis on central repo over simply presenting the ability to
use either/or.
As an additional note, the centralized repo is only as good as those
willing to post to it. I've run into the problem that the latest and
greatest are not always on ibiblio. I've also ran into the problem
that there are sometimes version gaps. Also, I've seen where there are
the same jars under different (but similar) group ids. I know i can
setup a local repo for jars. But, then i find myself wondering why.
Especially when i already have a versioning repository... SVN.
Many thanks for your time and responses,
Brandon
On 4/24/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That should be "Checking Sun Jars into your SVN repo". Obviously
> anyone is allowed to download the Sun Jars and install them into their
> own local Maven repo, or anything else permitted under the Sun BCL
> terms.
>
> Checking the jars into a publicly available distribution service ie
> Sourceforge CVS/SVN etc is unfortunately not allowed by Sun's
> licensing.
>
> You can go to Sun.com and read the specifics of the BCL if you want,
> to see what specifically is permitted and what is not.
>
> Wayne
>
> On 4/24/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Checking Sun Jars into your repo is a violation of the Sun Binary
> > Compatibility License which you agreed to when you downloaded the
> > file. (Assuming the file was downloaded from Sun under the Sun BCL
> > terms, which most files on Sun.com require you to accept prior to
> > downloading.)
> >
> > I doubt Sun will chase you down and prosecute you, but realize that
> > some of us actually care about respecting intellectual property and
> > license requirements. Complaining about the way these Sun Jars are
> > handled to the Maven User list is really the wrong place -- complain
> > directly to Sun, ask them to modify the distribution terms of their
> > licenses, etc.
> >
> > Wayne
> >
> > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > "tons of advantages" - please quantify this.
> > >
> > > Personally, I find the repository to be a "nice" piece of Maven. But,
> > > I don't see it as a cardinal sin to actually distribute libraries in
> > > your project. If you follow the libary naming convention then who
> > > cares?
> > >
> > > Personally, what i find annoying are the copious additional, needless,
> > > and redundant dependencies that i have to download because of the
> > > dependencies defined in the pom of a jar that i need to download. I
> > > also find it annoying to have to manually install several small
> > > libraries to my local repo cuz i can't distribute them as a result of
> > > licensing. It is additionally annoying to have to setup a jar
> > > repository that will be used for jars that will be needed that can
> > > only be distributed privately. All of this... vs. me just referencing
> > > them in my source tree?
> > >
> > > I like Maven a lot and really enjoy the standard project layout
> > > features and plugins that are provided. But, the jar repository has
> > > caused me more time and less efficiency. However, i do like ibiblio
> > > for a single one stop shop for grabbing jars i need... to drop in my
> > > source tree ;-)
> > >
> > > I like it when people can check out my source from SVN and simply
> > > build. This is possible when i place them in SVN. Heck, I can even
> > > check Sun Jars into my SVN repo! ;)
> > >
> > > Thanks to everyone for pointing me in the direction of the system.
> > > I'll be using it. I'm always open to a compelling argument and a tap
> > > on the forehead that helps me to see the light.
> > >
> > > Many Thanks,
> > > Brandon
> > >
> > > On 4/24/06, Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Well you can use *system* dependencies but you loose tons of
> > > > advantages. Instead, maybe you should just populate your local
> > > > repository using the install plugin and -o to run mvn offline.
> > > >
> > > > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > > > > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > > > > checked out from the code repository?
> > > > >
> > > > > Brandon
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > 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
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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: Dependencies Options
Posted by Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com>.
That should be "Checking Sun Jars into your SVN repo". Obviously
anyone is allowed to download the Sun Jars and install them into their
own local Maven repo, or anything else permitted under the Sun BCL
terms.
Checking the jars into a publicly available distribution service ie
Sourceforge CVS/SVN etc is unfortunately not allowed by Sun's
licensing.
You can go to Sun.com and read the specifics of the BCL if you want,
to see what specifically is permitted and what is not.
Wayne
On 4/24/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Checking Sun Jars into your repo is a violation of the Sun Binary
> Compatibility License which you agreed to when you downloaded the
> file. (Assuming the file was downloaded from Sun under the Sun BCL
> terms, which most files on Sun.com require you to accept prior to
> downloading.)
>
> I doubt Sun will chase you down and prosecute you, but realize that
> some of us actually care about respecting intellectual property and
> license requirements. Complaining about the way these Sun Jars are
> handled to the Maven User list is really the wrong place -- complain
> directly to Sun, ask them to modify the distribution terms of their
> licenses, etc.
>
> Wayne
>
> On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "tons of advantages" - please quantify this.
> >
> > Personally, I find the repository to be a "nice" piece of Maven. But,
> > I don't see it as a cardinal sin to actually distribute libraries in
> > your project. If you follow the libary naming convention then who
> > cares?
> >
> > Personally, what i find annoying are the copious additional, needless,
> > and redundant dependencies that i have to download because of the
> > dependencies defined in the pom of a jar that i need to download. I
> > also find it annoying to have to manually install several small
> > libraries to my local repo cuz i can't distribute them as a result of
> > licensing. It is additionally annoying to have to setup a jar
> > repository that will be used for jars that will be needed that can
> > only be distributed privately. All of this... vs. me just referencing
> > them in my source tree?
> >
> > I like Maven a lot and really enjoy the standard project layout
> > features and plugins that are provided. But, the jar repository has
> > caused me more time and less efficiency. However, i do like ibiblio
> > for a single one stop shop for grabbing jars i need... to drop in my
> > source tree ;-)
> >
> > I like it when people can check out my source from SVN and simply
> > build. This is possible when i place them in SVN. Heck, I can even
> > check Sun Jars into my SVN repo! ;)
> >
> > Thanks to everyone for pointing me in the direction of the system.
> > I'll be using it. I'm always open to a compelling argument and a tap
> > on the forehead that helps me to see the light.
> >
> > Many Thanks,
> > Brandon
> >
> > On 4/24/06, Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Well you can use *system* dependencies but you loose tons of
> > > advantages. Instead, maybe you should just populate your local
> > > repository using the install plugin and -o to run mvn offline.
> > >
> > > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > > > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > > > checked out from the code repository?
> > > >
> > > > Brandon
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > 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
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: Dependencies Options
Posted by Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com>.
For your reading pleasure:
1. You may reproduce and use the Software for
Individual, Commercial, or Research and Instructional
Use for the purposes of designing, developing,
testing, and running Your applets and applications
("Programs").
2. Subject to the terms and conditions of this
Agreement and restrictions and exceptions set forth in
the Software's documentation, You may reproduce and
distribute Software, provided that:
(a) you distribute the Software complete and
unmodified and only bundled as part of Your Programs,
(b) your Programs add significant and primary
functionality to the Software,
(c) you distribute Software for the sole purpose of
running your Programs,
(d) you do not distribute additional software intended
to replace any
component(s) of the Software,
(e) you do not remove or alter any proprietary legends
or notices contained in or on the Software.
(f) you only distribute the Software subject to a
license agreement that
protects Sun's interests consistent with the terms
contained in this
Agreement, and
(g) you agree to defend and indemnify Sun and its
licensors from and against any damages, costs,
liabilities, settlement amounts and/or expenses
(including attorneys' fees) incurred in connection
with any claim, lawsuit or action by any third party
that arises or results from the use or distribution of
any and all Programs and/or Software.
On 4/24/06, Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Checking Sun Jars into your repo is a violation of the Sun Binary
> Compatibility License which you agreed to when you downloaded the
> file. (Assuming the file was downloaded from Sun under the Sun BCL
> terms, which most files on Sun.com require you to accept prior to
> downloading.)
>
> I doubt Sun will chase you down and prosecute you, but realize that
> some of us actually care about respecting intellectual property and
> license requirements. Complaining about the way these Sun Jars are
> handled to the Maven User list is really the wrong place -- complain
> directly to Sun, ask them to modify the distribution terms of their
> licenses, etc.
>
> Wayne
>
> On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "tons of advantages" - please quantify this.
> >
> > Personally, I find the repository to be a "nice" piece of Maven. But,
> > I don't see it as a cardinal sin to actually distribute libraries in
> > your project. If you follow the libary naming convention then who
> > cares?
> >
> > Personally, what i find annoying are the copious additional, needless,
> > and redundant dependencies that i have to download because of the
> > dependencies defined in the pom of a jar that i need to download. I
> > also find it annoying to have to manually install several small
> > libraries to my local repo cuz i can't distribute them as a result of
> > licensing. It is additionally annoying to have to setup a jar
> > repository that will be used for jars that will be needed that can
> > only be distributed privately. All of this... vs. me just referencing
> > them in my source tree?
> >
> > I like Maven a lot and really enjoy the standard project layout
> > features and plugins that are provided. But, the jar repository has
> > caused me more time and less efficiency. However, i do like ibiblio
> > for a single one stop shop for grabbing jars i need... to drop in my
> > source tree ;-)
> >
> > I like it when people can check out my source from SVN and simply
> > build. This is possible when i place them in SVN. Heck, I can even
> > check Sun Jars into my SVN repo! ;)
> >
> > Thanks to everyone for pointing me in the direction of the system.
> > I'll be using it. I'm always open to a compelling argument and a tap
> > on the forehead that helps me to see the light.
> >
> > Many Thanks,
> > Brandon
> >
> > On 4/24/06, Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Well you can use *system* dependencies but you loose tons of
> > > advantages. Instead, maybe you should just populate your local
> > > repository using the install plugin and -o to run mvn offline.
> > >
> > > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > > > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > > > checked out from the code repository?
> > > >
> > > > Brandon
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > 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
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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: Dependencies Options
Posted by Wayne Fay <wa...@gmail.com>.
Checking Sun Jars into your repo is a violation of the Sun Binary
Compatibility License which you agreed to when you downloaded the
file. (Assuming the file was downloaded from Sun under the Sun BCL
terms, which most files on Sun.com require you to accept prior to
downloading.)
I doubt Sun will chase you down and prosecute you, but realize that
some of us actually care about respecting intellectual property and
license requirements. Complaining about the way these Sun Jars are
handled to the Maven User list is really the wrong place -- complain
directly to Sun, ask them to modify the distribution terms of their
licenses, etc.
Wayne
On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "tons of advantages" - please quantify this.
>
> Personally, I find the repository to be a "nice" piece of Maven. But,
> I don't see it as a cardinal sin to actually distribute libraries in
> your project. If you follow the libary naming convention then who
> cares?
>
> Personally, what i find annoying are the copious additional, needless,
> and redundant dependencies that i have to download because of the
> dependencies defined in the pom of a jar that i need to download. I
> also find it annoying to have to manually install several small
> libraries to my local repo cuz i can't distribute them as a result of
> licensing. It is additionally annoying to have to setup a jar
> repository that will be used for jars that will be needed that can
> only be distributed privately. All of this... vs. me just referencing
> them in my source tree?
>
> I like Maven a lot and really enjoy the standard project layout
> features and plugins that are provided. But, the jar repository has
> caused me more time and less efficiency. However, i do like ibiblio
> for a single one stop shop for grabbing jars i need... to drop in my
> source tree ;-)
>
> I like it when people can check out my source from SVN and simply
> build. This is possible when i place them in SVN. Heck, I can even
> check Sun Jars into my SVN repo! ;)
>
> Thanks to everyone for pointing me in the direction of the system.
> I'll be using it. I'm always open to a compelling argument and a tap
> on the forehead that helps me to see the light.
>
> Many Thanks,
> Brandon
>
> On 4/24/06, Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Well you can use *system* dependencies but you loose tons of
> > advantages. Instead, maybe you should just populate your local
> > repository using the install plugin and -o to run mvn offline.
> >
> > On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > > checked out from the code repository?
> > >
> > > Brandon
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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
> >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
>
>
Re: Dependencies Options
Posted by Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com>.
"tons of advantages" - please quantify this.
Personally, I find the repository to be a "nice" piece of Maven. But,
I don't see it as a cardinal sin to actually distribute libraries in
your project. If you follow the libary naming convention then who
cares?
Personally, what i find annoying are the copious additional, needless,
and redundant dependencies that i have to download because of the
dependencies defined in the pom of a jar that i need to download. I
also find it annoying to have to manually install several small
libraries to my local repo cuz i can't distribute them as a result of
licensing. It is additionally annoying to have to setup a jar
repository that will be used for jars that will be needed that can
only be distributed privately. All of this... vs. me just referencing
them in my source tree?
I like Maven a lot and really enjoy the standard project layout
features and plugins that are provided. But, the jar repository has
caused me more time and less efficiency. However, i do like ibiblio
for a single one stop shop for grabbing jars i need... to drop in my
source tree ;-)
I like it when people can check out my source from SVN and simply
build. This is possible when i place them in SVN. Heck, I can even
check Sun Jars into my SVN repo! ;)
Thanks to everyone for pointing me in the direction of the system.
I'll be using it. I'm always open to a compelling argument and a tap
on the forehead that helps me to see the light.
Many Thanks,
Brandon
On 4/24/06, Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well you can use *system* dependencies but you loose tons of
> advantages. Instead, maybe you should just populate your local
> repository using the install plugin and -o to run mvn offline.
>
> On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> > there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> > checked out from the code repository?
> >
> > Brandon
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
Re: Dependencies Options
Posted by Alexandre Poitras <al...@gmail.com>.
Well you can use *system* dependencies but you loose tons of
advantages. Instead, maybe you should just populate your local
repository using the install plugin and -o to run mvn offline.
On 4/24/06, Brandon Goodin <br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is it a requirement that i use the remote repository for jars? Is
> there a way to reference jars that are distributed with the code when
> checked out from the code repository?
>
> Brandon
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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