You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openjpa.apache.org by Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> on 2007/04/11 17:34:18 UTC
Artifact names
Hi,
I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for release 0.9.7.
Recently we made changes to remove -project from our the zip file names. The
problem is that the maven install and deploy goals ignore the names we
provide and generate their own names (
openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list archives and it
turns out this is a fairly common problem - usually resulting in a response
of "working as designed". Here's an example
http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project back into the names for
the 0.9.7 release?
The only other way I know of to fix the names that get deployed would be to
change the artifactId in the pom files (basically switch openjpa with
openjpa-project). Switching the names will impact anyone who has a
dependency on the base openjpa project. They'll have to update the version
number anyway, but it will still be a little confusing if they used to
depend on openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7.
Thanks,
--
-Michael Dick
Re: Artifact names
Posted by Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com>.
I've been overriding the deployment location for the staging directory. I
thought I made the changes back to trunk, but I must have missed it, I just
added it back in.
The changes configure the deploy plugin to look for a
deploy.altRepositoryvariable, if it's found we'll deploy to that
location.
The variable can be added in ${M2_HOME}/settings.xml like this :
<profiles>
<profile>
<id>release</id>
<properties> <deploy.altRepository>
people.apache.org::default::scp://people.apache.org/home/mikedd/public_html/staging-repository
</deploy.altRepository>
</properties>
</profile>
</profiles>
Run mvn -Prelease deploy and watch for scp and it will deploy to the
alternate location. If you just do the build from a subproject it should
work (haven't tried it though).
On 4/25/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> Does anyone happen to know if there is a way to override the
> <repository> part of the <distributionManagement> section of the
> pom.xml? If we were able to do that, we could keep the individual jar
> artifacts deployed to the http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-
> repository/org/apache/openjpa/ (so people can reference the
> individual artifacts as usual), but upload the artifacts from the
> openjpa-project sub-pom to a separate location?
>
>
>
> On Apr 25, 2007, at 10:29 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:
>
> > +1 to all that.
> >
> > What JDO does is publish the non-maven artifacts to the dist/db
> > directory (JDO is a db sub-project) and there is a script that
> > allows us to use the mirrors to let folks get the binary or source
> > download. And we publish the maven artifacts so that a user can
> > just write a pom and five lines of code later maven will download
> > the dependency tree. Sweet.
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > On Apr 25, 2007, at 7:07 AM, Eddie O'Neil wrote:
> >
> >> While in incubation, the best place for non-Maven downloads is here:
> >>
> >> http://people.apache.org/dist/incubator/
> >>
> >> Once out of incubation, the right place is here:
> >>
> >> http://www.apache.org/dist/
> >>
> >> which ties an artifact into the mirroring system. Then, there's a
> >> particular way to format the project's download page in order to list
> >> all of the mirrors as download options for that artifact a la:
> >>
> >> http://struts.apache.org/download.cgi
> >>
> >> Eddie
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4/25/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On 4/24/07, Phill Moran <pj...@rogers.com> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > I don't think you want the tarball in maven. Personally I would
> >>> not look
> >>> > for it
> >>> > there or go searching my local repo to open and get examples,
> >>> docs etc.
> >>> > Can we
> >>> > keep the tarball on OpenJPA and the minimal compile an
> >>> execution jar on
> >>> > Maven.
> >>> > Keep in mind that this jar is replicated on maven, corp repo
> >>> then local
> >>> > repo - a
> >>> > lot of wasted space if not absolutely necessary.
> >>> >
> >>> > Phill
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I agree, if we put the tarball in a different location then we
> >>> should remove
> >>> it from the maven repository at the same time. It shouldn't be
> >>> too tricky to
> >>> separate the tarball generation from the normal build processing
> >>> (in which
> >>> case maven won't deploy the tarball).
> >>>
> >>> Assuming this is the right way to go, where would be put the
> >>> tarball?
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> > From: Patrick Linskey [mailto:plinskey@bea.com]
> >>> > Sent: April 24, 2007 10:49 PM
> >>> > To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>> > Subject: RE: Artifact names
> >>> >
> >>> > > Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve
> >>> different needs
> >>> > > for different development environments.
> >>> >
> >>> > I agree completely. Just wondering if we should be publishing
> >>> the tarball
> >>> > via
> >>> > mvn.
> >>> >
> >>> -Patrick
> >>> >
> >>> > --
> >>> > Patrick Linskey
> >>> > BEA Systems, Inc.
> >>> >
> >>> ____________________________________________________________________
> >>> ___
> >>> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> >>> contain
> >>> > information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and
> >>> affiliated
> >>> > entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
> >>> copyrighted and/or
> >>> > legally
> >>> > privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the
> >>> individual or entity
> >>> > named
> >>> > in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and
> >>> have received
> >>> > this
> >>> > message in error, please immediately return this by email and
> >>> then delete
> >>> > it.
> >>> >
> >>> > > -----Original Message-----
> >>> > > From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
> >>> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:41 PM
> >>> > > To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>> > > Subject: Re: Artifact names
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > It's a fair question -- if you want people to be able to sync
> >>> > > dependencies from Maven directly into their projects via pom.xml
> >>> > > references, then the Maven repository is the way to go.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > If you want to distribute a single package that contains
> >>> everything
> >>> > > (binaries, docs, samples, etc) needed to get started with
> >>> OpenJPA and
> >>> > > doesn't require the user to use the Maven project model, then
> >>> the
> >>> > > source / binary zip archives are the way to go.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve
> >>> different needs
> >>> > > for different development environments.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Eddie
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > On 4/24/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > On Apr 24, 2007, at 7:27 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > Hmm. I wonder if we're really using Maven repositories
> >>> correctly.
> >>> > > > > Do we
> >>> > > > > need our dist to be in Maven at all?
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > We don't need to. It was just easy to set up that way.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > I do think that we should have something that's easy to
> >>> depend on
> >>> > > > > that pulls in the openjpa-persistence-jdbc module,
> >>> without making
> >>> > > > > people have to know about that level of modularity detail.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > Why can't they just depend on openjpa-all? That brings
> >>> > > everything in...
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > > -Patrick
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > --
> >>> > > > > Patrick Linskey
> >>> > > > > BEA Systems, Inc.
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > >
> >>> ____________________________________________________________________
> >>> > > > > __
> >>> > > > > _
> >>> > > > > Notice: This email message, together with any
> >>> attachments, may
> >>> > > > > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
> >>> > > subsidiaries and
> >>> > > > > affiliated entities, that may be confidential,
> >>> proprietary,
> >>> > > > > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended
> >>> solely for
> >>> > > > > the use of the individual or entity named in this
> >>> message. If you
> >>> > > > > are not the intended recipient, and have received this
> >>> message in
> >>> > > > > error, please immediately return this by email and then
> >>> delete it.
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > >> -----Original Message-----
> >>> > > > >> From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
> >>> > > > >> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:05 PM
> >>> > > > >> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>> > > > >> Subject: Re: Artifact names
> >>> > > > >>
> >>> > > > >>
> >>> > > > >> +1 -- I'd prefer to have the binary / source uber-
> >>> archives
> >>> > > > >> outside of the Maven repro, though that's more due to
> >>> convention
> >>> > > > >> than anything else.
> >>> > > > >>
> >>> > > > >> I agree that it's not worth worrying about this for
> >>> 0.9.7.
> >>> > > > >>
> >>> > > > >> Cheers,
> >>> > > > >> Eddie
> >>> > > > >>
> >>> > > > >>
> >>> > > > >> On 4/24/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> > > > >>> I'm finally getting back to this thread, sorry for the
> >>> delay.
> >>> > > > >>>
> >>> > > > >>> I got a similar answer from the maven mailing list.
> >>> > > Their stance
> >>> > > > >>> is that the maven repository is for artifacts which are
> >>> used by
> >>> > > > >>> maven, which wouldn't be the same as a final
> >>> destination for our
> >>> > > > >> distribution.
> >>> > > > >>>
> >>> > > > >>> I'm in favor of moving the source and binary archives to a
> >>> > > > >> different
> >>> > > > >>> location, if there's a good spot available to us. Does
> >>> > > > >> anyone object
> >>> > > > >>> to putting the releases somewhere outside of a maven
> >>> repository?
> >>> > > > >>>
> >>> > > > >>> I don't think this is urgent for the 0.9.7 release
> >>> since we
> >>> > > > >> can't get
> >>> > > > >>> rid of the ugly -project names now, but it might be
> >>> > > nice to have a
> >>> > > > >>> solution for when OpenJPA graduates.
> >>> > > > >>>
> >>> > > > >>> On 4/12/07, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
> >>> > > > >>>>
> >>> > > > >>>> In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven likes,
> >>> > > > >> but when
> >>> > > > >>>> we publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for
> >>> website
> >>> > > > >>>> downloads), we name the files as we like.
> >>> > > > >>>>
> >>> > > > >>>> -dain
> >>> > > > >>>>
> >>> > > > >>>> On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
> >>> > > > >>>>
> >>> > > > >>>>> Hi,
> >>> > > > >>>>>
> >>> > > > >>>>> I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging
> >>> repository for
> >>> > > > >>>>> release 0.9.7.
> >>> > > > >>>>> Recently we made changes to remove -project from our
> >>> > > > >> the zip file
> >>> > > > >>>>> names. The problem is that the maven install and
> >>> deploy goals
> >>> > > > >>>>> ignore the names we provide and generate their own
> >>> names (
> >>> > > > >>>>> openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
> >>> > > > >>>>>
> >>> > > > >>>>> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing
> >>> list
> >>> > > > >>>>> archives and it turns out this is a fairly common
> >>> problem -
> >>> > > > >>>>> usually resulting in a response of "working as
> >>> > > > >> designed". Here's
> >>> > > > >>>>> an example
> >>> > > > >>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
> >>> > > > >>>>> tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
> >>> > > > >>>>>
> >>> > > > >>>>> Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project
> >>> > > back into the
> >>> > > > >>>>> names for the 0.9.7 release?
> >>> > > > >>>>>
> >>> > > > >>>>> The only other way I know of to fix the names that
> >>> > > get deployed
> >>> > > > >>>>> would be to change the artifactId in the pom files
> >>> (basically
> >>> > > > >>>>> switch openjpa with openjpa-project). Switching the
> >>> > > names will
> >>> > > > >>>>> impact anyone who has a dependency on the base
> >>> > > openjpa project.
> >>> > > > >>>>> They'll have to update the version number anyway, but
> >>> it will
> >>> > > > >>>>> still be a little confusing if they used to depend on
> >>> > > > >>>>> openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-
> >>> project-0.9.7.
> >>> > > > >>>>>
> >>> > > > >>>>> Thanks,
> >>> > > > >>>>>
> >>> > > > >>>>> --
> >>> > > > >>>>> -Michael Dick
> >>> > > > >>>>
> >>> > > > >>>>
> >>> > > > >>>
> >>> > > > >>>
> >>> > > > >>> --
> >>> > > > >>> -Michael Dick
> >>> > > > >>>
> >>> > > > >>
> >>> > > > >
> >>> > > > > Notice: This email message, together with any
> >>> attachments, may
> >>> > > > > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
> >>> > > subsidiaries and
> >>> > > > > affiliated entities, that may be confidential,
> >>> proprietary,
> >>> > > > > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended
> >>> > > solely for
> >>> > > > > the use of the individual or entity named in this
> >>> message. If you
> >>> > > > > are not the intended recipient, and have received this
> >>> message in
> >>> > > > > error, please immediately return this by email and then
> >>> delete it.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > >
> >>> > >
> >>> >
> >>> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> >>> contain
> >>> > information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and
> >>> affiliated
> >>> > entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
> >>> copyrighted and/or
> >>> > legally
> >>> > privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the
> >>> individual or entity
> >>> > named
> >>> > in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and
> >>> have received
> >>> > this
> >>> > message in error, please immediately return this by email and
> >>> then delete
> >>> > it.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> -Michael Dick
> >>>
> >
> > Craig Russell
> > Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
> > 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> > P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
> >
>
>
--
-Michael Dick
Re: Artifact names
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
Hi Marc,
After you have built the artifacts that are not in fact maven
artifacts, you should be able to simply copy them to the staging
repository on your local people.a.o directory and thence to their
dist/ directory for publication to the world.
Craig
On Apr 25, 2007, at 11:25 AM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
>
> Does anyone happen to know if there is a way to override the
> <repository> part of the <distributionManagement> section of the
> pom.xml? If we were able to do that, we could keep the individual
> jar artifacts deployed to the http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-
> snapshot-repository/org/apache/openjpa/ (so people can reference
> the individual artifacts as usual), but upload the artifacts from
> the openjpa-project sub-pom to a separate location?
>
>
>
> On Apr 25, 2007, at 10:29 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:
>
>> +1 to all that.
>>
>> What JDO does is publish the non-maven artifacts to the dist/db
>> directory (JDO is a db sub-project) and there is a script that
>> allows us to use the mirrors to let folks get the binary or source
>> download. And we publish the maven artifacts so that a user can
>> just write a pom and five lines of code later maven will download
>> the dependency tree. Sweet.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>> On Apr 25, 2007, at 7:07 AM, Eddie O'Neil wrote:
>>
>>> While in incubation, the best place for non-Maven downloads is
>>> here:
>>>
>>> http://people.apache.org/dist/incubator/
>>>
>>> Once out of incubation, the right place is here:
>>>
>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/
>>>
>>> which ties an artifact into the mirroring system. Then, there's a
>>> particular way to format the project's download page in order to
>>> list
>>> all of the mirrors as download options for that artifact a la:
>>>
>>> http://struts.apache.org/download.cgi
>>>
>>> Eddie
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4/25/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 4/24/07, Phill Moran <pj...@rogers.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > I don't think you want the tarball in maven. Personally I
>>>> would not look
>>>> > for it
>>>> > there or go searching my local repo to open and get examples,
>>>> docs etc.
>>>> > Can we
>>>> > keep the tarball on OpenJPA and the minimal compile an
>>>> execution jar on
>>>> > Maven.
>>>> > Keep in mind that this jar is replicated on maven, corp repo
>>>> then local
>>>> > repo - a
>>>> > lot of wasted space if not absolutely necessary.
>>>> >
>>>> > Phill
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I agree, if we put the tarball in a different location then we
>>>> should remove
>>>> it from the maven repository at the same time. It shouldn't be
>>>> too tricky to
>>>> separate the tarball generation from the normal build processing
>>>> (in which
>>>> case maven won't deploy the tarball).
>>>>
>>>> Assuming this is the right way to go, where would be put the
>>>> tarball?
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> > From: Patrick Linskey [mailto:plinskey@bea.com]
>>>> > Sent: April 24, 2007 10:49 PM
>>>> > To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> > Subject: RE: Artifact names
>>>> >
>>>> > > Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve
>>>> different needs
>>>> > > for different development environments.
>>>> >
>>>> > I agree completely. Just wondering if we should be publishing
>>>> the tarball
>>>> > via
>>>> > mvn.
>>>> >
>>>> -Patrick
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > Patrick Linskey
>>>> > BEA Systems, Inc.
>>>> >
>>>> ___________________________________________________________________
>>>> ____
>>>> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments,
>>>> may contain
>>>> > information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and
>>>> affiliated
>>>> > entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
>>>> copyrighted and/or
>>>> > legally
>>>> > privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the
>>>> individual or entity
>>>> > named
>>>> > in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and
>>>> have received
>>>> > this
>>>> > message in error, please immediately return this by email and
>>>> then delete
>>>> > it.
>>>> >
>>>> > > -----Original Message-----
>>>> > > From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
>>>> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:41 PM
>>>> > > To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> > > Subject: Re: Artifact names
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > It's a fair question -- if you want people to be able to sync
>>>> > > dependencies from Maven directly into their projects via
>>>> pom.xml
>>>> > > references, then the Maven repository is the way to go.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > If you want to distribute a single package that contains
>>>> everything
>>>> > > (binaries, docs, samples, etc) needed to get started with
>>>> OpenJPA and
>>>> > > doesn't require the user to use the Maven project model,
>>>> then the
>>>> > > source / binary zip archives are the way to go.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve
>>>> different needs
>>>> > > for different development environments.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Eddie
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On 4/24/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > On Apr 24, 2007, at 7:27 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > > Hmm. I wonder if we're really using Maven repositories
>>>> correctly.
>>>> > > > > Do we
>>>> > > > > need our dist to be in Maven at all?
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > We don't need to. It was just easy to set up that way.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > > I do think that we should have something that's easy to
>>>> depend on
>>>> > > > > that pulls in the openjpa-persistence-jdbc module,
>>>> without making
>>>> > > > > people have to know about that level of modularity detail.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Why can't they just depend on openjpa-all? That brings
>>>> > > everything in...
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > > -Patrick
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > --
>>>> > > > > Patrick Linskey
>>>> > > > > BEA Systems, Inc.
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > >
>>>> ___________________________________________________________________
>>>> _
>>>> > > > > __
>>>> > > > > _
>>>> > > > > Notice: This email message, together with any
>>>> attachments, may
>>>> > > > > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
>>>> > > subsidiaries and
>>>> > > > > affiliated entities, that may be confidential,
>>>> proprietary,
>>>> > > > > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended
>>>> solely for
>>>> > > > > the use of the individual or entity named in this
>>>> message. If you
>>>> > > > > are not the intended recipient, and have received this
>>>> message in
>>>> > > > > error, please immediately return this by email and then
>>>> delete it.
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > >> -----Original Message-----
>>>> > > > >> From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
>>>> > > > >> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:05 PM
>>>> > > > >> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> > > > >> Subject: Re: Artifact names
>>>> > > > >>
>>>> > > > >>
>>>> > > > >> +1 -- I'd prefer to have the binary / source uber-
>>>> archives
>>>> > > > >> outside of the Maven repro, though that's more due to
>>>> convention
>>>> > > > >> than anything else.
>>>> > > > >>
>>>> > > > >> I agree that it's not worth worrying about this for
>>>> 0.9.7.
>>>> > > > >>
>>>> > > > >> Cheers,
>>>> > > > >> Eddie
>>>> > > > >>
>>>> > > > >>
>>>> > > > >> On 4/24/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > > > >>> I'm finally getting back to this thread, sorry for the
>>>> delay.
>>>> > > > >>>
>>>> > > > >>> I got a similar answer from the maven mailing list.
>>>> > > Their stance
>>>> > > > >>> is that the maven repository is for artifacts which
>>>> are used by
>>>> > > > >>> maven, which wouldn't be the same as a final
>>>> destination for our
>>>> > > > >> distribution.
>>>> > > > >>>
>>>> > > > >>> I'm in favor of moving the source and binary archives
>>>> to a
>>>> > > > >> different
>>>> > > > >>> location, if there's a good spot available to us. Does
>>>> > > > >> anyone object
>>>> > > > >>> to putting the releases somewhere outside of a maven
>>>> repository?
>>>> > > > >>>
>>>> > > > >>> I don't think this is urgent for the 0.9.7 release
>>>> since we
>>>> > > > >> can't get
>>>> > > > >>> rid of the ugly -project names now, but it might be
>>>> > > nice to have a
>>>> > > > >>> solution for when OpenJPA graduates.
>>>> > > > >>>
>>>> > > > >>> On 4/12/07, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
>>>> > > > >>>>
>>>> > > > >>>> In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven
>>>> likes,
>>>> > > > >> but when
>>>> > > > >>>> we publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for
>>>> website
>>>> > > > >>>> downloads), we name the files as we like.
>>>> > > > >>>>
>>>> > > > >>>> -dain
>>>> > > > >>>>
>>>> > > > >>>> On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
>>>> > > > >>>>
>>>> > > > >>>>> Hi,
>>>> > > > >>>>>
>>>> > > > >>>>> I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging
>>>> repository for
>>>> > > > >>>>> release 0.9.7.
>>>> > > > >>>>> Recently we made changes to remove -project from our
>>>> > > > >> the zip file
>>>> > > > >>>>> names. The problem is that the maven install and
>>>> deploy goals
>>>> > > > >>>>> ignore the names we provide and generate their own
>>>> names (
>>>> > > > >>>>> openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
>>>> > > > >>>>>
>>>> > > > >>>>> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org
>>>> mailing list
>>>> > > > >>>>> archives and it turns out this is a fairly common
>>>> problem -
>>>> > > > >>>>> usually resulting in a response of "working as
>>>> > > > >> designed". Here's
>>>> > > > >>>>> an example
>>>> > > > >>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
>>>> > > > >>>>> tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
>>>> > > > >>>>>
>>>> > > > >>>>> Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project
>>>> > > back into the
>>>> > > > >>>>> names for the 0.9.7 release?
>>>> > > > >>>>>
>>>> > > > >>>>> The only other way I know of to fix the names that
>>>> > > get deployed
>>>> > > > >>>>> would be to change the artifactId in the pom files
>>>> (basically
>>>> > > > >>>>> switch openjpa with openjpa-project). Switching the
>>>> > > names will
>>>> > > > >>>>> impact anyone who has a dependency on the base
>>>> > > openjpa project.
>>>> > > > >>>>> They'll have to update the version number anyway,
>>>> but it will
>>>> > > > >>>>> still be a little confusing if they used to depend on
>>>> > > > >>>>> openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-
>>>> project-0.9.7.
>>>> > > > >>>>>
>>>> > > > >>>>> Thanks,
>>>> > > > >>>>>
>>>> > > > >>>>> --
>>>> > > > >>>>> -Michael Dick
>>>> > > > >>>>
>>>> > > > >>>>
>>>> > > > >>>
>>>> > > > >>>
>>>> > > > >>> --
>>>> > > > >>> -Michael Dick
>>>> > > > >>>
>>>> > > > >>
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > Notice: This email message, together with any
>>>> attachments, may
>>>> > > > > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
>>>> > > subsidiaries and
>>>> > > > > affiliated entities, that may be confidential,
>>>> proprietary,
>>>> > > > > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended
>>>> > > solely for
>>>> > > > > the use of the individual or entity named in this
>>>> message. If you
>>>> > > > > are not the intended recipient, and have received this
>>>> message in
>>>> > > > > error, please immediately return this by email and then
>>>> delete it.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > >
>>>> > >
>>>> >
>>>> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments,
>>>> may contain
>>>> > information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and
>>>> affiliated
>>>> > entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
>>>> copyrighted and/or
>>>> > legally
>>>> > privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the
>>>> individual or entity
>>>> > named
>>>> > in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and
>>>> have received
>>>> > this
>>>> > message in error, please immediately return this by email and
>>>> then delete
>>>> > it.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> -Michael Dick
>>>>
>>
>> Craig Russell
>> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/
>> jdo
>> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>>
>
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: Artifact names
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
On Apr 25, 2007, at 11:25 AM, Marc Prud'hommeaux wrote:
>
> Does anyone happen to know if there is a way to override the
> <repository> part of the <distributionManagement> section of the
> pom.xml? If we were able to do that, we could keep the individual
> jar artifacts deployed to the http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-
> snapshot-repository/org/apache/openjpa/ (so people can reference
> the individual artifacts as usual), but upload the artifacts from
> the openjpa-project sub-pom to a separate location?
>
>
>
> On Apr 25, 2007, at 10:29 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:
>
>> +1 to all that.
>>
>> What JDO does is publish the non-maven artifacts to the dist/db
>> directory (JDO is a db sub-project) and there is a script that
>> allows us to use the mirrors to let folks get the binary or source
>> download. And we publish the maven artifacts so that a user can
>> just write a pom and five lines of code later maven will download
>> the dependency tree. Sweet.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>> On Apr 25, 2007, at 7:07 AM, Eddie O'Neil wrote:
>>
>>> While in incubation, the best place for non-Maven downloads is
>>> here:
>>>
>>> http://people.apache.org/dist/incubator/
>>>
>>> Once out of incubation, the right place is here:
>>>
>>> http://www.apache.org/dist/
>>>
>>> which ties an artifact into the mirroring system. Then, there's a
>>> particular way to format the project's download page in order to
>>> list
>>> all of the mirrors as download options for that artifact a la:
>>>
>>> http://struts.apache.org/download.cgi
>>>
>>> Eddie
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4/25/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 4/24/07, Phill Moran <pj...@rogers.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > I don't think you want the tarball in maven. Personally I
>>>> would not look
>>>> > for it
>>>> > there or go searching my local repo to open and get examples,
>>>> docs etc.
>>>> > Can we
>>>> > keep the tarball on OpenJPA and the minimal compile an
>>>> execution jar on
>>>> > Maven.
>>>> > Keep in mind that this jar is replicated on maven, corp repo
>>>> then local
>>>> > repo - a
>>>> > lot of wasted space if not absolutely necessary.
>>>> >
>>>> > Phill
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I agree, if we put the tarball in a different location then we
>>>> should remove
>>>> it from the maven repository at the same time. It shouldn't be
>>>> too tricky to
>>>> separate the tarball generation from the normal build processing
>>>> (in which
>>>> case maven won't deploy the tarball).
>>>>
>>>> Assuming this is the right way to go, where would be put the
>>>> tarball?
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> > From: Patrick Linskey [mailto:plinskey@bea.com]
>>>> > Sent: April 24, 2007 10:49 PM
>>>> > To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> > Subject: RE: Artifact names
>>>> >
>>>> > > Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve
>>>> different needs
>>>> > > for different development environments.
>>>> >
>>>> > I agree completely. Just wondering if we should be publishing
>>>> the tarball
>>>> > via
>>>> > mvn.
>>>> >
>>>> -Patrick
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > Patrick Linskey
>>>> > BEA Systems, Inc.
>>>> >
>>>> ___________________________________________________________________
>>>> ____
>>>> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments,
>>>> may contain
>>>> > information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and
>>>> affiliated
>>>> > entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
>>>> copyrighted and/or
>>>> > legally
>>>> > privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the
>>>> individual or entity
>>>> > named
>>>> > in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and
>>>> have received
>>>> > this
>>>> > message in error, please immediately return this by email and
>>>> then delete
>>>> > it.
>>>> >
>>>> > > -----Original Message-----
>>>> > > From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
>>>> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:41 PM
>>>> > > To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> > > Subject: Re: Artifact names
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > It's a fair question -- if you want people to be able to sync
>>>> > > dependencies from Maven directly into their projects via
>>>> pom.xml
>>>> > > references, then the Maven repository is the way to go.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > If you want to distribute a single package that contains
>>>> everything
>>>> > > (binaries, docs, samples, etc) needed to get started with
>>>> OpenJPA and
>>>> > > doesn't require the user to use the Maven project model,
>>>> then the
>>>> > > source / binary zip archives are the way to go.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve
>>>> different needs
>>>> > > for different development environments.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Eddie
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On 4/24/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > On Apr 24, 2007, at 7:27 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > > Hmm. I wonder if we're really using Maven repositories
>>>> correctly.
>>>> > > > > Do we
>>>> > > > > need our dist to be in Maven at all?
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > We don't need to. It was just easy to set up that way.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > > I do think that we should have something that's easy to
>>>> depend on
>>>> > > > > that pulls in the openjpa-persistence-jdbc module,
>>>> without making
>>>> > > > > people have to know about that level of modularity detail.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > Why can't they just depend on openjpa-all? That brings
>>>> > > everything in...
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > > > -Patrick
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > --
>>>> > > > > Patrick Linskey
>>>> > > > > BEA Systems, Inc.
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > >
>>>> ___________________________________________________________________
>>>> _
>>>> > > > > __
>>>> > > > > _
>>>> > > > > Notice: This email message, together with any
>>>> attachments, may
>>>> > > > > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
>>>> > > subsidiaries and
>>>> > > > > affiliated entities, that may be confidential,
>>>> proprietary,
>>>> > > > > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended
>>>> solely for
>>>> > > > > the use of the individual or entity named in this
>>>> message. If you
>>>> > > > > are not the intended recipient, and have received this
>>>> message in
>>>> > > > > error, please immediately return this by email and then
>>>> delete it.
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > >> -----Original Message-----
>>>> > > > >> From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
>>>> > > > >> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:05 PM
>>>> > > > >> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> > > > >> Subject: Re: Artifact names
>>>> > > > >>
>>>> > > > >>
>>>> > > > >> +1 -- I'd prefer to have the binary / source uber-
>>>> archives
>>>> > > > >> outside of the Maven repro, though that's more due to
>>>> convention
>>>> > > > >> than anything else.
>>>> > > > >>
>>>> > > > >> I agree that it's not worth worrying about this for
>>>> 0.9.7.
>>>> > > > >>
>>>> > > > >> Cheers,
>>>> > > > >> Eddie
>>>> > > > >>
>>>> > > > >>
>>>> > > > >> On 4/24/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > > > >>> I'm finally getting back to this thread, sorry for the
>>>> delay.
>>>> > > > >>>
>>>> > > > >>> I got a similar answer from the maven mailing list.
>>>> > > Their stance
>>>> > > > >>> is that the maven repository is for artifacts which
>>>> are used by
>>>> > > > >>> maven, which wouldn't be the same as a final
>>>> destination for our
>>>> > > > >> distribution.
>>>> > > > >>>
>>>> > > > >>> I'm in favor of moving the source and binary archives
>>>> to a
>>>> > > > >> different
>>>> > > > >>> location, if there's a good spot available to us. Does
>>>> > > > >> anyone object
>>>> > > > >>> to putting the releases somewhere outside of a maven
>>>> repository?
>>>> > > > >>>
>>>> > > > >>> I don't think this is urgent for the 0.9.7 release
>>>> since we
>>>> > > > >> can't get
>>>> > > > >>> rid of the ugly -project names now, but it might be
>>>> > > nice to have a
>>>> > > > >>> solution for when OpenJPA graduates.
>>>> > > > >>>
>>>> > > > >>> On 4/12/07, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
>>>> > > > >>>>
>>>> > > > >>>> In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven
>>>> likes,
>>>> > > > >> but when
>>>> > > > >>>> we publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for
>>>> website
>>>> > > > >>>> downloads), we name the files as we like.
>>>> > > > >>>>
>>>> > > > >>>> -dain
>>>> > > > >>>>
>>>> > > > >>>> On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
>>>> > > > >>>>
>>>> > > > >>>>> Hi,
>>>> > > > >>>>>
>>>> > > > >>>>> I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging
>>>> repository for
>>>> > > > >>>>> release 0.9.7.
>>>> > > > >>>>> Recently we made changes to remove -project from our
>>>> > > > >> the zip file
>>>> > > > >>>>> names. The problem is that the maven install and
>>>> deploy goals
>>>> > > > >>>>> ignore the names we provide and generate their own
>>>> names (
>>>> > > > >>>>> openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
>>>> > > > >>>>>
>>>> > > > >>>>> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org
>>>> mailing list
>>>> > > > >>>>> archives and it turns out this is a fairly common
>>>> problem -
>>>> > > > >>>>> usually resulting in a response of "working as
>>>> > > > >> designed". Here's
>>>> > > > >>>>> an example
>>>> > > > >>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
>>>> > > > >>>>> tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
>>>> > > > >>>>>
>>>> > > > >>>>> Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project
>>>> > > back into the
>>>> > > > >>>>> names for the 0.9.7 release?
>>>> > > > >>>>>
>>>> > > > >>>>> The only other way I know of to fix the names that
>>>> > > get deployed
>>>> > > > >>>>> would be to change the artifactId in the pom files
>>>> (basically
>>>> > > > >>>>> switch openjpa with openjpa-project). Switching the
>>>> > > names will
>>>> > > > >>>>> impact anyone who has a dependency on the base
>>>> > > openjpa project.
>>>> > > > >>>>> They'll have to update the version number anyway,
>>>> but it will
>>>> > > > >>>>> still be a little confusing if they used to depend on
>>>> > > > >>>>> openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-
>>>> project-0.9.7.
>>>> > > > >>>>>
>>>> > > > >>>>> Thanks,
>>>> > > > >>>>>
>>>> > > > >>>>> --
>>>> > > > >>>>> -Michael Dick
>>>> > > > >>>>
>>>> > > > >>>>
>>>> > > > >>>
>>>> > > > >>>
>>>> > > > >>> --
>>>> > > > >>> -Michael Dick
>>>> > > > >>>
>>>> > > > >>
>>>> > > > >
>>>> > > > > Notice: This email message, together with any
>>>> attachments, may
>>>> > > > > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
>>>> > > subsidiaries and
>>>> > > > > affiliated entities, that may be confidential,
>>>> proprietary,
>>>> > > > > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended
>>>> > > solely for
>>>> > > > > the use of the individual or entity named in this
>>>> message. If you
>>>> > > > > are not the intended recipient, and have received this
>>>> message in
>>>> > > > > error, please immediately return this by email and then
>>>> delete it.
>>>> > > >
>>>> > > >
>>>> > >
>>>> >
>>>> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments,
>>>> may contain
>>>> > information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and
>>>> affiliated
>>>> > entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
>>>> copyrighted and/or
>>>> > legally
>>>> > privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the
>>>> individual or entity
>>>> > named
>>>> > in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and
>>>> have received
>>>> > this
>>>> > message in error, please immediately return this by email and
>>>> then delete
>>>> > it.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> -Michael Dick
>>>>
>>
>> Craig Russell
>> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/
>> jdo
>> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
>> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>>
>
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: Artifact names
Posted by Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org>.
Does anyone happen to know if there is a way to override the
<repository> part of the <distributionManagement> section of the
pom.xml? If we were able to do that, we could keep the individual jar
artifacts deployed to the http://people.apache.org/repo/m2-snapshot-
repository/org/apache/openjpa/ (so people can reference the
individual artifacts as usual), but upload the artifacts from the
openjpa-project sub-pom to a separate location?
On Apr 25, 2007, at 10:29 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:
> +1 to all that.
>
> What JDO does is publish the non-maven artifacts to the dist/db
> directory (JDO is a db sub-project) and there is a script that
> allows us to use the mirrors to let folks get the binary or source
> download. And we publish the maven artifacts so that a user can
> just write a pom and five lines of code later maven will download
> the dependency tree. Sweet.
>
> Craig
>
> On Apr 25, 2007, at 7:07 AM, Eddie O'Neil wrote:
>
>> While in incubation, the best place for non-Maven downloads is here:
>>
>> http://people.apache.org/dist/incubator/
>>
>> Once out of incubation, the right place is here:
>>
>> http://www.apache.org/dist/
>>
>> which ties an artifact into the mirroring system. Then, there's a
>> particular way to format the project's download page in order to list
>> all of the mirrors as download options for that artifact a la:
>>
>> http://struts.apache.org/download.cgi
>>
>> Eddie
>>
>>
>> On 4/25/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 4/24/07, Phill Moran <pj...@rogers.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I don't think you want the tarball in maven. Personally I would
>>> not look
>>> > for it
>>> > there or go searching my local repo to open and get examples,
>>> docs etc.
>>> > Can we
>>> > keep the tarball on OpenJPA and the minimal compile an
>>> execution jar on
>>> > Maven.
>>> > Keep in mind that this jar is replicated on maven, corp repo
>>> then local
>>> > repo - a
>>> > lot of wasted space if not absolutely necessary.
>>> >
>>> > Phill
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree, if we put the tarball in a different location then we
>>> should remove
>>> it from the maven repository at the same time. It shouldn't be
>>> too tricky to
>>> separate the tarball generation from the normal build processing
>>> (in which
>>> case maven won't deploy the tarball).
>>>
>>> Assuming this is the right way to go, where would be put the
>>> tarball?
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> > From: Patrick Linskey [mailto:plinskey@bea.com]
>>> > Sent: April 24, 2007 10:49 PM
>>> > To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> > Subject: RE: Artifact names
>>> >
>>> > > Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve
>>> different needs
>>> > > for different development environments.
>>> >
>>> > I agree completely. Just wondering if we should be publishing
>>> the tarball
>>> > via
>>> > mvn.
>>> >
>>> -Patrick
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Patrick Linskey
>>> > BEA Systems, Inc.
>>> >
>>> ____________________________________________________________________
>>> ___
>>> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
>>> contain
>>> > information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and
>>> affiliated
>>> > entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
>>> copyrighted and/or
>>> > legally
>>> > privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the
>>> individual or entity
>>> > named
>>> > in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and
>>> have received
>>> > this
>>> > message in error, please immediately return this by email and
>>> then delete
>>> > it.
>>> >
>>> > > -----Original Message-----
>>> > > From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
>>> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:41 PM
>>> > > To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> > > Subject: Re: Artifact names
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > It's a fair question -- if you want people to be able to sync
>>> > > dependencies from Maven directly into their projects via pom.xml
>>> > > references, then the Maven repository is the way to go.
>>> > >
>>> > > If you want to distribute a single package that contains
>>> everything
>>> > > (binaries, docs, samples, etc) needed to get started with
>>> OpenJPA and
>>> > > doesn't require the user to use the Maven project model, then
>>> the
>>> > > source / binary zip archives are the way to go.
>>> > >
>>> > > Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve
>>> different needs
>>> > > for different development environments.
>>> > >
>>> > > Eddie
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > On 4/24/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > On Apr 24, 2007, at 7:27 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > Hmm. I wonder if we're really using Maven repositories
>>> correctly.
>>> > > > > Do we
>>> > > > > need our dist to be in Maven at all?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > We don't need to. It was just easy to set up that way.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > I do think that we should have something that's easy to
>>> depend on
>>> > > > > that pulls in the openjpa-persistence-jdbc module,
>>> without making
>>> > > > > people have to know about that level of modularity detail.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Why can't they just depend on openjpa-all? That brings
>>> > > everything in...
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > -Patrick
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > --
>>> > > > > Patrick Linskey
>>> > > > > BEA Systems, Inc.
>>> > > > >
>>> > >
>>> ____________________________________________________________________
>>> > > > > __
>>> > > > > _
>>> > > > > Notice: This email message, together with any
>>> attachments, may
>>> > > > > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
>>> > > subsidiaries and
>>> > > > > affiliated entities, that may be confidential,
>>> proprietary,
>>> > > > > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended
>>> solely for
>>> > > > > the use of the individual or entity named in this
>>> message. If you
>>> > > > > are not the intended recipient, and have received this
>>> message in
>>> > > > > error, please immediately return this by email and then
>>> delete it.
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > >> -----Original Message-----
>>> > > > >> From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
>>> > > > >> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:05 PM
>>> > > > >> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> > > > >> Subject: Re: Artifact names
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >> +1 -- I'd prefer to have the binary / source uber-
>>> archives
>>> > > > >> outside of the Maven repro, though that's more due to
>>> convention
>>> > > > >> than anything else.
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >> I agree that it's not worth worrying about this for
>>> 0.9.7.
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >> Cheers,
>>> > > > >> Eddie
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >> On 4/24/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > > > >>> I'm finally getting back to this thread, sorry for the
>>> delay.
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>> I got a similar answer from the maven mailing list.
>>> > > Their stance
>>> > > > >>> is that the maven repository is for artifacts which are
>>> used by
>>> > > > >>> maven, which wouldn't be the same as a final
>>> destination for our
>>> > > > >> distribution.
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>> I'm in favor of moving the source and binary archives to a
>>> > > > >> different
>>> > > > >>> location, if there's a good spot available to us. Does
>>> > > > >> anyone object
>>> > > > >>> to putting the releases somewhere outside of a maven
>>> repository?
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>> I don't think this is urgent for the 0.9.7 release
>>> since we
>>> > > > >> can't get
>>> > > > >>> rid of the ugly -project names now, but it might be
>>> > > nice to have a
>>> > > > >>> solution for when OpenJPA graduates.
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>> On 4/12/07, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>>> In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven likes,
>>> > > > >> but when
>>> > > > >>>> we publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for
>>> website
>>> > > > >>>> downloads), we name the files as we like.
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>>> -dain
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>>> On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>>>> Hi,
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>> I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging
>>> repository for
>>> > > > >>>>> release 0.9.7.
>>> > > > >>>>> Recently we made changes to remove -project from our
>>> > > > >> the zip file
>>> > > > >>>>> names. The problem is that the maven install and
>>> deploy goals
>>> > > > >>>>> ignore the names we provide and generate their own
>>> names (
>>> > > > >>>>> openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing
>>> list
>>> > > > >>>>> archives and it turns out this is a fairly common
>>> problem -
>>> > > > >>>>> usually resulting in a response of "working as
>>> > > > >> designed". Here's
>>> > > > >>>>> an example
>>> > > > >>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
>>> > > > >>>>> tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>> Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project
>>> > > back into the
>>> > > > >>>>> names for the 0.9.7 release?
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>> The only other way I know of to fix the names that
>>> > > get deployed
>>> > > > >>>>> would be to change the artifactId in the pom files
>>> (basically
>>> > > > >>>>> switch openjpa with openjpa-project). Switching the
>>> > > names will
>>> > > > >>>>> impact anyone who has a dependency on the base
>>> > > openjpa project.
>>> > > > >>>>> They'll have to update the version number anyway, but
>>> it will
>>> > > > >>>>> still be a little confusing if they used to depend on
>>> > > > >>>>> openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-
>>> project-0.9.7.
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>> Thanks,
>>> > > > >>>>>
>>> > > > >>>>> --
>>> > > > >>>>> -Michael Dick
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>>>
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>> --
>>> > > > >>> -Michael Dick
>>> > > > >>>
>>> > > > >>
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > Notice: This email message, together with any
>>> attachments, may
>>> > > > > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
>>> > > subsidiaries and
>>> > > > > affiliated entities, that may be confidential,
>>> proprietary,
>>> > > > > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended
>>> > > solely for
>>> > > > > the use of the individual or entity named in this
>>> message. If you
>>> > > > > are not the intended recipient, and have received this
>>> message in
>>> > > > > error, please immediately return this by email and then
>>> delete it.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
>>> contain
>>> > information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and
>>> affiliated
>>> > entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
>>> copyrighted and/or
>>> > legally
>>> > privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the
>>> individual or entity
>>> > named
>>> > in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and
>>> have received
>>> > this
>>> > message in error, please immediately return this by email and
>>> then delete
>>> > it.
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> -Michael Dick
>>>
>
> Craig Russell
> Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
> 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
>
Re: Artifact names
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
+1 to all that.
What JDO does is publish the non-maven artifacts to the dist/db
directory (JDO is a db sub-project) and there is a script that allows
us to use the mirrors to let folks get the binary or source download.
And we publish the maven artifacts so that a user can just write a
pom and five lines of code later maven will download the dependency
tree. Sweet.
Craig
On Apr 25, 2007, at 7:07 AM, Eddie O'Neil wrote:
> While in incubation, the best place for non-Maven downloads is here:
>
> http://people.apache.org/dist/incubator/
>
> Once out of incubation, the right place is here:
>
> http://www.apache.org/dist/
>
> which ties an artifact into the mirroring system. Then, there's a
> particular way to format the project's download page in order to list
> all of the mirrors as download options for that artifact a la:
>
> http://struts.apache.org/download.cgi
>
> Eddie
>
>
> On 4/25/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 4/24/07, Phill Moran <pj...@rogers.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > I don't think you want the tarball in maven. Personally I would
>> not look
>> > for it
>> > there or go searching my local repo to open and get examples,
>> docs etc.
>> > Can we
>> > keep the tarball on OpenJPA and the minimal compile an execution
>> jar on
>> > Maven.
>> > Keep in mind that this jar is replicated on maven, corp repo
>> then local
>> > repo - a
>> > lot of wasted space if not absolutely necessary.
>> >
>> > Phill
>>
>>
>> I agree, if we put the tarball in a different location then we
>> should remove
>> it from the maven repository at the same time. It shouldn't be too
>> tricky to
>> separate the tarball generation from the normal build processing
>> (in which
>> case maven won't deploy the tarball).
>>
>> Assuming this is the right way to go, where would be put the tarball?
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Patrick Linskey [mailto:plinskey@bea.com]
>> > Sent: April 24, 2007 10:49 PM
>> > To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> > Subject: RE: Artifact names
>> >
>> > > Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve
>> different needs
>> > > for different development environments.
>> >
>> > I agree completely. Just wondering if we should be publishing
>> the tarball
>> > via
>> > mvn.
>> >
>> -Patrick
>> >
>> > --
>> > Patrick Linskey
>> > BEA Systems, Inc.
>> >
>> _____________________________________________________________________
>> __
>> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
>> contain
>> > information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and
>> affiliated
>> > entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted
>> and/or
>> > legally
>> > privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
>> or entity
>> > named
>> > in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have
>> received
>> > this
>> > message in error, please immediately return this by email and
>> then delete
>> > it.
>> >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
>> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:41 PM
>> > > To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> > > Subject: Re: Artifact names
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > It's a fair question -- if you want people to be able to sync
>> > > dependencies from Maven directly into their projects via pom.xml
>> > > references, then the Maven repository is the way to go.
>> > >
>> > > If you want to distribute a single package that contains
>> everything
>> > > (binaries, docs, samples, etc) needed to get started with
>> OpenJPA and
>> > > doesn't require the user to use the Maven project model, then the
>> > > source / binary zip archives are the way to go.
>> > >
>> > > Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve
>> different needs
>> > > for different development environments.
>> > >
>> > > Eddie
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On 4/24/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > On Apr 24, 2007, at 7:27 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Hmm. I wonder if we're really using Maven repositories
>> correctly.
>> > > > > Do we
>> > > > > need our dist to be in Maven at all?
>> > > >
>> > > > We don't need to. It was just easy to set up that way.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > I do think that we should have something that's easy to
>> depend on
>> > > > > that pulls in the openjpa-persistence-jdbc module, without
>> making
>> > > > > people have to know about that level of modularity detail.
>> > > >
>> > > > Why can't they just depend on openjpa-all? That brings
>> > > everything in...
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > -Patrick
>> > > > >
>> > > > > --
>> > > > > Patrick Linskey
>> > > > > BEA Systems, Inc.
>> > > > >
>> > >
>> ____________________________________________________________________
>> > > > > __
>> > > > > _
>> > > > > Notice: This email message, together with any
>> attachments, may
>> > > > > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
>> > > subsidiaries and
>> > > > > affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
>> > > > > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended
>> solely for
>> > > > > the use of the individual or entity named in this message.
>> If you
>> > > > > are not the intended recipient, and have received this
>> message in
>> > > > > error, please immediately return this by email and then
>> delete it.
>> > > > >
>> > > > >> -----Original Message-----
>> > > > >> From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
>> > > > >> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:05 PM
>> > > > >> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> > > > >> Subject: Re: Artifact names
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> +1 -- I'd prefer to have the binary / source uber-archives
>> > > > >> outside of the Maven repro, though that's more due to
>> convention
>> > > > >> than anything else.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> I agree that it's not worth worrying about this for 0.9.7.
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Cheers,
>> > > > >> Eddie
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> On 4/24/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > >>> I'm finally getting back to this thread, sorry for the
>> delay.
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> I got a similar answer from the maven mailing list.
>> > > Their stance
>> > > > >>> is that the maven repository is for artifacts which are
>> used by
>> > > > >>> maven, which wouldn't be the same as a final destination
>> for our
>> > > > >> distribution.
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> I'm in favor of moving the source and binary archives to a
>> > > > >> different
>> > > > >>> location, if there's a good spot available to us. Does
>> > > > >> anyone object
>> > > > >>> to putting the releases somewhere outside of a maven
>> repository?
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> I don't think this is urgent for the 0.9.7 release since we
>> > > > >> can't get
>> > > > >>> rid of the ugly -project names now, but it might be
>> > > nice to have a
>> > > > >>> solution for when OpenJPA graduates.
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> On 4/12/07, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
>> > > > >>>>
>> > > > >>>> In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven likes,
>> > > > >> but when
>> > > > >>>> we publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for website
>> > > > >>>> downloads), we name the files as we like.
>> > > > >>>>
>> > > > >>>> -dain
>> > > > >>>>
>> > > > >>>> On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
>> > > > >>>>
>> > > > >>>>> Hi,
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>> I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging
>> repository for
>> > > > >>>>> release 0.9.7.
>> > > > >>>>> Recently we made changes to remove -project from our
>> > > > >> the zip file
>> > > > >>>>> names. The problem is that the maven install and
>> deploy goals
>> > > > >>>>> ignore the names we provide and generate their own
>> names (
>> > > > >>>>> openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing
>> list
>> > > > >>>>> archives and it turns out this is a fairly common
>> problem -
>> > > > >>>>> usually resulting in a response of "working as
>> > > > >> designed". Here's
>> > > > >>>>> an example
>> > > > >>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
>> > > > >>>>> tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>> Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project
>> > > back into the
>> > > > >>>>> names for the 0.9.7 release?
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>> The only other way I know of to fix the names that
>> > > get deployed
>> > > > >>>>> would be to change the artifactId in the pom files
>> (basically
>> > > > >>>>> switch openjpa with openjpa-project). Switching the
>> > > names will
>> > > > >>>>> impact anyone who has a dependency on the base
>> > > openjpa project.
>> > > > >>>>> They'll have to update the version number anyway, but
>> it will
>> > > > >>>>> still be a little confusing if they used to depend on
>> > > > >>>>> openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-
>> project-0.9.7.
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>> Thanks,
>> > > > >>>>>
>> > > > >>>>> --
>> > > > >>>>> -Michael Dick
>> > > > >>>>
>> > > > >>>>
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>> --
>> > > > >>> -Michael Dick
>> > > > >>>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Notice: This email message, together with any
>> attachments, may
>> > > > > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
>> > > subsidiaries and
>> > > > > affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
>> > > > > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended
>> > > solely for
>> > > > > the use of the individual or entity named in this message.
>> If you
>> > > > > are not the intended recipient, and have received this
>> message in
>> > > > > error, please immediately return this by email and then
>> delete it.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
>> contain
>> > information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and
>> affiliated
>> > entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted
>> and/or
>> > legally
>> > privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
>> or entity
>> > named
>> > in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have
>> received
>> > this
>> > message in error, please immediately return this by email and
>> then delete
>> > it.
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> -Michael Dick
>>
Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: Artifact names
Posted by Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com>.
While in incubation, the best place for non-Maven downloads is here:
http://people.apache.org/dist/incubator/
Once out of incubation, the right place is here:
http://www.apache.org/dist/
which ties an artifact into the mirroring system. Then, there's a
particular way to format the project's download page in order to list
all of the mirrors as download options for that artifact a la:
http://struts.apache.org/download.cgi
Eddie
On 4/25/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/24/07, Phill Moran <pj...@rogers.com> wrote:
> >
> > I don't think you want the tarball in maven. Personally I would not look
> > for it
> > there or go searching my local repo to open and get examples, docs etc.
> > Can we
> > keep the tarball on OpenJPA and the minimal compile an execution jar on
> > Maven.
> > Keep in mind that this jar is replicated on maven, corp repo then local
> > repo - a
> > lot of wasted space if not absolutely necessary.
> >
> > Phill
>
>
> I agree, if we put the tarball in a different location then we should remove
> it from the maven repository at the same time. It shouldn't be too tricky to
> separate the tarball generation from the normal build processing (in which
> case maven won't deploy the tarball).
>
> Assuming this is the right way to go, where would be put the tarball?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> > From: Patrick Linskey [mailto:plinskey@bea.com]
> > Sent: April 24, 2007 10:49 PM
> > To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: Artifact names
> >
> > > Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve different needs
> > > for different development environments.
> >
> > I agree completely. Just wondering if we should be publishing the tarball
> > via
> > mvn.
> >
> -Patrick
> >
> > --
> > Patrick Linskey
> > BEA Systems, Inc.
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
> > information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated
> > entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or
> > legally
> > privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity
> > named
> > in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received
> > this
> > message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete
> > it.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:41 PM
> > > To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Artifact names
> > >
> > >
> > > It's a fair question -- if you want people to be able to sync
> > > dependencies from Maven directly into their projects via pom.xml
> > > references, then the Maven repository is the way to go.
> > >
> > > If you want to distribute a single package that contains everything
> > > (binaries, docs, samples, etc) needed to get started with OpenJPA and
> > > doesn't require the user to use the Maven project model, then the
> > > source / binary zip archives are the way to go.
> > >
> > > Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve different needs
> > > for different development environments.
> > >
> > > Eddie
> > >
> > >
> > > On 4/24/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Apr 24, 2007, at 7:27 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hmm. I wonder if we're really using Maven repositories correctly.
> > > > > Do we
> > > > > need our dist to be in Maven at all?
> > > >
> > > > We don't need to. It was just easy to set up that way.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > I do think that we should have something that's easy to depend on
> > > > > that pulls in the openjpa-persistence-jdbc module, without making
> > > > > people have to know about that level of modularity detail.
> > > >
> > > > Why can't they just depend on openjpa-all? That brings
> > > everything in...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -Patrick
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Patrick Linskey
> > > > > BEA Systems, Inc.
> > > > >
> > > ____________________________________________________________________
> > > > > __
> > > > > _
> > > > > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> > > > > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
> > > subsidiaries and
> > > > > affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
> > > > > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for
> > > > > the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you
> > > > > are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in
> > > > > error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
> > > > >
> > > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > > >> From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
> > > > >> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:05 PM
> > > > >> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > >> Subject: Re: Artifact names
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> +1 -- I'd prefer to have the binary / source uber-archives
> > > > >> outside of the Maven repro, though that's more due to convention
> > > > >> than anything else.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I agree that it's not worth worrying about this for 0.9.7.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Cheers,
> > > > >> Eddie
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On 4/24/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>> I'm finally getting back to this thread, sorry for the delay.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> I got a similar answer from the maven mailing list.
> > > Their stance
> > > > >>> is that the maven repository is for artifacts which are used by
> > > > >>> maven, which wouldn't be the same as a final destination for our
> > > > >> distribution.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> I'm in favor of moving the source and binary archives to a
> > > > >> different
> > > > >>> location, if there's a good spot available to us. Does
> > > > >> anyone object
> > > > >>> to putting the releases somewhere outside of a maven repository?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> I don't think this is urgent for the 0.9.7 release since we
> > > > >> can't get
> > > > >>> rid of the ugly -project names now, but it might be
> > > nice to have a
> > > > >>> solution for when OpenJPA graduates.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On 4/12/07, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven likes,
> > > > >> but when
> > > > >>>> we publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for website
> > > > >>>> downloads), we name the files as we like.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> -dain
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>> Hi,
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for
> > > > >>>>> release 0.9.7.
> > > > >>>>> Recently we made changes to remove -project from our
> > > > >> the zip file
> > > > >>>>> names. The problem is that the maven install and deploy goals
> > > > >>>>> ignore the names we provide and generate their own names (
> > > > >>>>> openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list
> > > > >>>>> archives and it turns out this is a fairly common problem -
> > > > >>>>> usually resulting in a response of "working as
> > > > >> designed". Here's
> > > > >>>>> an example
> > > > >>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
> > > > >>>>> tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project
> > > back into the
> > > > >>>>> names for the 0.9.7 release?
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> The only other way I know of to fix the names that
> > > get deployed
> > > > >>>>> would be to change the artifactId in the pom files (basically
> > > > >>>>> switch openjpa with openjpa-project). Switching the
> > > names will
> > > > >>>>> impact anyone who has a dependency on the base
> > > openjpa project.
> > > > >>>>> They'll have to update the version number anyway, but it will
> > > > >>>>> still be a little confusing if they used to depend on
> > > > >>>>> openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Thanks,
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> --
> > > > >>>>> -Michael Dick
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> --
> > > > >>> -Michael Dick
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> > > > > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
> > > subsidiaries and
> > > > > affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
> > > > > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended
> > > solely for
> > > > > the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you
> > > > > are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in
> > > > > error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
> > information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated
> > entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or
> > legally
> > privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity
> > named
> > in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received
> > this
> > message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete
> > it.
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> -Michael Dick
>
Re: Artifact names
Posted by Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com>.
On 4/24/07, Phill Moran <pj...@rogers.com> wrote:
>
> I don't think you want the tarball in maven. Personally I would not look
> for it
> there or go searching my local repo to open and get examples, docs etc.
> Can we
> keep the tarball on OpenJPA and the minimal compile an execution jar on
> Maven.
> Keep in mind that this jar is replicated on maven, corp repo then local
> repo - a
> lot of wasted space if not absolutely necessary.
>
> Phill
I agree, if we put the tarball in a different location then we should remove
it from the maven repository at the same time. It shouldn't be too tricky to
separate the tarball generation from the normal build processing (in which
case maven won't deploy the tarball).
Assuming this is the right way to go, where would be put the tarball?
-----Original Message-----
> From: Patrick Linskey [mailto:plinskey@bea.com]
> Sent: April 24, 2007 10:49 PM
> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Artifact names
>
> > Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve different needs
> > for different development environments.
>
> I agree completely. Just wondering if we should be publishing the tarball
> via
> mvn.
>
-Patrick
>
> --
> Patrick Linskey
> BEA Systems, Inc.
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
> information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated
> entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or
> legally
> privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity
> named
> in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received
> this
> message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete
> it.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:41 PM
> > To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Artifact names
> >
> >
> > It's a fair question -- if you want people to be able to sync
> > dependencies from Maven directly into their projects via pom.xml
> > references, then the Maven repository is the way to go.
> >
> > If you want to distribute a single package that contains everything
> > (binaries, docs, samples, etc) needed to get started with OpenJPA and
> > doesn't require the user to use the Maven project model, then the
> > source / binary zip archives are the way to go.
> >
> > Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve different needs
> > for different development environments.
> >
> > Eddie
> >
> >
> > On 4/24/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Apr 24, 2007, at 7:27 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hmm. I wonder if we're really using Maven repositories correctly.
> > > > Do we
> > > > need our dist to be in Maven at all?
> > >
> > > We don't need to. It was just easy to set up that way.
> > >
> > >
> > > > I do think that we should have something that's easy to depend on
> > > > that pulls in the openjpa-persistence-jdbc module, without making
> > > > people have to know about that level of modularity detail.
> > >
> > > Why can't they just depend on openjpa-all? That brings
> > everything in...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -Patrick
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Patrick Linskey
> > > > BEA Systems, Inc.
> > > >
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> > > > __
> > > > _
> > > > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> > > > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
> > subsidiaries and
> > > > affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
> > > > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for
> > > > the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you
> > > > are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in
> > > > error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
> > > >
> > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > >> From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
> > > >> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:05 PM
> > > >> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > >> Subject: Re: Artifact names
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> +1 -- I'd prefer to have the binary / source uber-archives
> > > >> outside of the Maven repro, though that's more due to convention
> > > >> than anything else.
> > > >>
> > > >> I agree that it's not worth worrying about this for 0.9.7.
> > > >>
> > > >> Cheers,
> > > >> Eddie
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On 4/24/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>> I'm finally getting back to this thread, sorry for the delay.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I got a similar answer from the maven mailing list.
> > Their stance
> > > >>> is that the maven repository is for artifacts which are used by
> > > >>> maven, which wouldn't be the same as a final destination for our
> > > >> distribution.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I'm in favor of moving the source and binary archives to a
> > > >> different
> > > >>> location, if there's a good spot available to us. Does
> > > >> anyone object
> > > >>> to putting the releases somewhere outside of a maven repository?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I don't think this is urgent for the 0.9.7 release since we
> > > >> can't get
> > > >>> rid of the ugly -project names now, but it might be
> > nice to have a
> > > >>> solution for when OpenJPA graduates.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 4/12/07, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven likes,
> > > >> but when
> > > >>>> we publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for website
> > > >>>> downloads), we name the files as we like.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> -dain
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> Hi,
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for
> > > >>>>> release 0.9.7.
> > > >>>>> Recently we made changes to remove -project from our
> > > >> the zip file
> > > >>>>> names. The problem is that the maven install and deploy goals
> > > >>>>> ignore the names we provide and generate their own names (
> > > >>>>> openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list
> > > >>>>> archives and it turns out this is a fairly common problem -
> > > >>>>> usually resulting in a response of "working as
> > > >> designed". Here's
> > > >>>>> an example
> > > >>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
> > > >>>>> tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project
> > back into the
> > > >>>>> names for the 0.9.7 release?
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> The only other way I know of to fix the names that
> > get deployed
> > > >>>>> would be to change the artifactId in the pom files (basically
> > > >>>>> switch openjpa with openjpa-project). Switching the
> > names will
> > > >>>>> impact anyone who has a dependency on the base
> > openjpa project.
> > > >>>>> They'll have to update the version number anyway, but it will
> > > >>>>> still be a little confusing if they used to depend on
> > > >>>>> openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Thanks,
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> --
> > > >>>>> -Michael Dick
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> --
> > > >>> -Michael Dick
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> > > > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
> > subsidiaries and
> > > > affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
> > > > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended
> > solely for
> > > > the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you
> > > > are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in
> > > > error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
> information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated
> entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or
> legally
> privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity
> named
> in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received
> this
> message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete
> it.
>
>
--
-Michael Dick
RE: Artifact names
Posted by Phill Moran <pj...@rogers.com>.
I don't think you want the tarball in maven. Personally I would not look for it
there or go searching my local repo to open and get examples, docs etc. Can we
keep the tarball on OpenJPA and the minimal compile an execution jar on Maven.
Keep in mind that this jar is replicated on maven, corp repo then local repo - a
lot of wasted space if not absolutely necessary.
Phill
-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Linskey [mailto:plinskey@bea.com]
Sent: April 24, 2007 10:49 PM
To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: Artifact names
> Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve different needs
> for different development environments.
I agree completely. Just wondering if we should be publishing the tarball via
mvn.
-Patrick
--
Patrick Linskey
BEA Systems, Inc.
_______________________________________________________________________
Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated
entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally
privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named
in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this
message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:41 PM
> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Artifact names
>
>
> It's a fair question -- if you want people to be able to sync
> dependencies from Maven directly into their projects via pom.xml
> references, then the Maven repository is the way to go.
>
> If you want to distribute a single package that contains everything
> (binaries, docs, samples, etc) needed to get started with OpenJPA and
> doesn't require the user to use the Maven project model, then the
> source / binary zip archives are the way to go.
>
> Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve different needs
> for different development environments.
>
> Eddie
>
>
> On 4/24/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Apr 24, 2007, at 7:27 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
> >
> > > Hmm. I wonder if we're really using Maven repositories correctly.
> > > Do we
> > > need our dist to be in Maven at all?
> >
> > We don't need to. It was just easy to set up that way.
> >
> >
> > > I do think that we should have something that's easy to depend on
> > > that pulls in the openjpa-persistence-jdbc module, without making
> > > people have to know about that level of modularity detail.
> >
> > Why can't they just depend on openjpa-all? That brings
> everything in...
> >
> >
> >
> > > -Patrick
> > >
> > > --
> > > Patrick Linskey
> > > BEA Systems, Inc.
> > >
> ____________________________________________________________________
> > > __
> > > _
> > > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> > > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
> subsidiaries and
> > > affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
> > > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for
> > > the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you
> > > are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in
> > > error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
> > >> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:05 PM
> > >> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > >> Subject: Re: Artifact names
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> +1 -- I'd prefer to have the binary / source uber-archives
> > >> outside of the Maven repro, though that's more due to convention
> > >> than anything else.
> > >>
> > >> I agree that it's not worth worrying about this for 0.9.7.
> > >>
> > >> Cheers,
> > >> Eddie
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 4/24/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> I'm finally getting back to this thread, sorry for the delay.
> > >>>
> > >>> I got a similar answer from the maven mailing list.
> Their stance
> > >>> is that the maven repository is for artifacts which are used by
> > >>> maven, which wouldn't be the same as a final destination for our
> > >> distribution.
> > >>>
> > >>> I'm in favor of moving the source and binary archives to a
> > >> different
> > >>> location, if there's a good spot available to us. Does
> > >> anyone object
> > >>> to putting the releases somewhere outside of a maven repository?
> > >>>
> > >>> I don't think this is urgent for the 0.9.7 release since we
> > >> can't get
> > >>> rid of the ugly -project names now, but it might be
> nice to have a
> > >>> solution for when OpenJPA graduates.
> > >>>
> > >>> On 4/12/07, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven likes,
> > >> but when
> > >>>> we publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for website
> > >>>> downloads), we name the files as we like.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> -dain
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Hi,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for
> > >>>>> release 0.9.7.
> > >>>>> Recently we made changes to remove -project from our
> > >> the zip file
> > >>>>> names. The problem is that the maven install and deploy goals
> > >>>>> ignore the names we provide and generate their own names (
> > >>>>> openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list
> > >>>>> archives and it turns out this is a fairly common problem -
> > >>>>> usually resulting in a response of "working as
> > >> designed". Here's
> > >>>>> an example
> > >>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
> > >>>>> tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project
> back into the
> > >>>>> names for the 0.9.7 release?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The only other way I know of to fix the names that
> get deployed
> > >>>>> would be to change the artifactId in the pom files (basically
> > >>>>> switch openjpa with openjpa-project). Switching the
> names will
> > >>>>> impact anyone who has a dependency on the base
> openjpa project.
> > >>>>> They'll have to update the version number anyway, but it will
> > >>>>> still be a little confusing if they used to depend on
> > >>>>> openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> --
> > >>>>> -Michael Dick
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> -Michael Dick
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> > > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> > > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
> subsidiaries and
> > > affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
> > > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended
> solely for
> > > the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you
> > > are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in
> > > error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
> >
> >
>
Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated
entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally
privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named
in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this
message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
RE: Artifact names
Posted by Patrick Linskey <pl...@bea.com>.
> Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve
> different needs for different development environments.
I agree completely. Just wondering if we should be publishing the
tarball via mvn.
-Patrick
--
Patrick Linskey
BEA Systems, Inc.
_______________________________________________________________________
Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated
entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or
legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
and have received this message in error, please immediately return this
by email and then delete it.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:41 PM
> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Artifact names
>
>
> It's a fair question -- if you want people to be able to
> sync dependencies from Maven directly into their projects via
> pom.xml references, then the Maven repository is the way to go.
>
> If you want to distribute a single package that contains
> everything (binaries, docs, samples, etc) needed to get
> started with OpenJPA and doesn't require the user to use the
> Maven project model, then the source / binary zip archives
> are the way to go.
>
> Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve
> different needs for different development environments.
>
> Eddie
>
>
> On 4/24/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Apr 24, 2007, at 7:27 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
> >
> > > Hmm. I wonder if we're really using Maven repositories correctly.
> > > Do we
> > > need our dist to be in Maven at all?
> >
> > We don't need to. It was just easy to set up that way.
> >
> >
> > > I do think that we should have something that's easy to depend on
> > > that pulls in the openjpa-persistence-jdbc module, without making
> > > people have to know about that level of modularity detail.
> >
> > Why can't they just depend on openjpa-all? That brings
> everything in...
> >
> >
> >
> > > -Patrick
> > >
> > > --
> > > Patrick Linskey
> > > BEA Systems, Inc.
> > >
> ____________________________________________________________________
> > > __
> > > _
> > > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> > > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
> subsidiaries and
> > > affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
> > > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for
> > > the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you
> > > are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in
> > > error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
> > >> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:05 PM
> > >> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > >> Subject: Re: Artifact names
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> +1 -- I'd prefer to have the binary / source uber-archives
> > >> outside of the Maven repro, though that's more due to convention
> > >> than anything else.
> > >>
> > >> I agree that it's not worth worrying about this for 0.9.7.
> > >>
> > >> Cheers,
> > >> Eddie
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 4/24/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> I'm finally getting back to this thread, sorry for the delay.
> > >>>
> > >>> I got a similar answer from the maven mailing list.
> Their stance
> > >>> is that the maven repository is for artifacts which are used by
> > >>> maven, which wouldn't be the same as a final destination for our
> > >> distribution.
> > >>>
> > >>> I'm in favor of moving the source and binary archives to a
> > >> different
> > >>> location, if there's a good spot available to us. Does
> > >> anyone object
> > >>> to putting the releases somewhere outside of a maven repository?
> > >>>
> > >>> I don't think this is urgent for the 0.9.7 release since we
> > >> can't get
> > >>> rid of the ugly -project names now, but it might be
> nice to have a
> > >>> solution for when OpenJPA graduates.
> > >>>
> > >>> On 4/12/07, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven likes,
> > >> but when
> > >>>> we publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for website
> > >>>> downloads), we name the files as we like.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> -dain
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Hi,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for
> > >>>>> release 0.9.7.
> > >>>>> Recently we made changes to remove -project from our
> > >> the zip file
> > >>>>> names. The problem is that the maven install and deploy goals
> > >>>>> ignore the names we provide and generate their own names (
> > >>>>> openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list
> > >>>>> archives and it turns out this is a fairly common problem -
> > >>>>> usually resulting in a response of "working as
> > >> designed". Here's
> > >>>>> an example
> > >>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
> > >>>>> tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project
> back into the
> > >>>>> names for the 0.9.7 release?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The only other way I know of to fix the names that
> get deployed
> > >>>>> would be to change the artifactId in the pom files (basically
> > >>>>> switch openjpa with openjpa-project). Switching the
> names will
> > >>>>> impact anyone who has a dependency on the base
> openjpa project.
> > >>>>> They'll have to update the version number anyway, but it will
> > >>>>> still be a little confusing if they used to depend on
> > >>>>> openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> --
> > >>>>> -Michael Dick
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> -Michael Dick
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> > > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> > > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
> subsidiaries and
> > > affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
> > > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended
> solely for
> > > the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you
> > > are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in
> > > error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
> >
> >
>
Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
Re: Artifact names
Posted by Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com>.
It's a fair question -- if you want people to be able to sync
dependencies from Maven directly into their projects via pom.xml
references, then the Maven repository is the way to go.
If you want to distribute a single package that contains everything
(binaries, docs, samples, etc) needed to get started with OpenJPA and
doesn't require the user to use the Maven project model, then the
source / binary zip archives are the way to go.
Personally, I think both are valuable as they serve different needs
for different development environments.
Eddie
On 4/24/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Apr 24, 2007, at 7:27 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
>
> > Hmm. I wonder if we're really using Maven repositories correctly.
> > Do we
> > need our dist to be in Maven at all?
>
> We don't need to. It was just easy to set up that way.
>
>
> > I do think that we should have something that's easy to depend on that
> > pulls in the openjpa-persistence-jdbc module, without making people
> > have
> > to know about that level of modularity detail.
>
> Why can't they just depend on openjpa-all? That brings everything in...
>
>
>
> > -Patrick
> >
> > --
> > Patrick Linskey
> > BEA Systems, Inc.
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > _
> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> > contain
> > information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and
> > affiliated
> > entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted
> > and/or
> > legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the
> > individual
> > or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended
> > recipient,
> > and have received this message in error, please immediately return
> > this
> > by email and then delete it.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:05 PM
> >> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: Artifact names
> >>
> >>
> >> +1 -- I'd prefer to have the binary / source uber-archives
> >> outside of the Maven repro, though that's more due to
> >> convention than anything else.
> >>
> >> I agree that it's not worth worrying about this for 0.9.7.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Eddie
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4/24/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> I'm finally getting back to this thread, sorry for the delay.
> >>>
> >>> I got a similar answer from the maven mailing list. Their stance is
> >>> that the maven repository is for artifacts which are used by maven,
> >>> which wouldn't be the same as a final destination for our
> >> distribution.
> >>>
> >>> I'm in favor of moving the source and binary archives to a
> >> different
> >>> location, if there's a good spot available to us. Does
> >> anyone object
> >>> to putting the releases somewhere outside of a maven repository?
> >>>
> >>> I don't think this is urgent for the 0.9.7 release since we
> >> can't get
> >>> rid of the ugly -project names now, but it might be nice to have a
> >>> solution for when OpenJPA graduates.
> >>>
> >>> On 4/12/07, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven likes,
> >> but when
> >>>> we publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for website
> >>>> downloads), we name the files as we like.
> >>>>
> >>>> -dain
> >>>>
> >>>> On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for
> >>>>> release 0.9.7.
> >>>>> Recently we made changes to remove -project from our
> >> the zip file
> >>>>> names. The problem is that the maven install and deploy goals
> >>>>> ignore the names we provide and generate their own names (
> >>>>> openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list
> >>>>> archives and it turns out this is a fairly common problem -
> >>>>> usually resulting in a response of "working as
> >> designed". Here's
> >>>>> an example
> >>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
> >>>>> tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project back into the
> >>>>> names for the 0.9.7 release?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The only other way I know of to fix the names that get deployed
> >>>>> would be to change the artifactId in the pom files (basically
> >>>>> switch openjpa with openjpa-project). Switching the names will
> >>>>> impact anyone who has a dependency on the base openjpa project.
> >>>>> They'll have to update the version number anyway, but it will
> >>>>> still be a little confusing if they used to depend on
> >>>>> openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> -Michael Dick
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> -Michael Dick
> >>>
> >>
> >
> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries
> > and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
> > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for
> > the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you
> > are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in
> > error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
>
>
RE: Artifact names
Posted by Patrick Linskey <pl...@bea.com>.
Hmm. Maybe we should think about this for when we move out of
integration.
-Patrick
--
Patrick Linskey
BEA Systems, Inc.
_______________________________________________________________________
Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated
entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or
legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
and have received this message in error, please immediately return this
by email and then delete it.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Prud'hommeaux [mailto:mprudhomapache@gmail.com] On
> Behalf Of Marc Prud'hommeaux
> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:54 PM
> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Artifact names
>
>
> > It's just a bit odd to have the '-all' bit in there. Is it
> possible to
> > make the top-level pom publish the same stuff that openjpa-all
> > currently does?
>
> Not that I've ever been able to figure out. IIRC, a parent
> project is not allowed to depend on child modules, and a
> child module is not allowed to rename the artifact that it publishes.
>
>
>
> On Apr 24, 2007, at 7:40 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
>
> >>> I do think that we should have something that's easy to
> >> depend on that
> >>> pulls in the openjpa-persistence-jdbc module, without
> making people
> >>> have to know about that level of modularity detail.
> >>
> >> Why can't they just depend on openjpa-all? That brings everything
> >> in...
> >
> > It's just a bit odd to have the '-all' bit in there. Is it
> possible to
> > make the top-level pom publish the same stuff that openjpa-all
> > currently does?
> >
> > -Patrick
> >
> > --
> > Patrick Linskey
> > BEA Systems, Inc.
> >
> ______________________________________________________________________
> > _
> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> > contain
> > information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and
> > affiliated
> > entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted
> > and/or
> > legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the
> > individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the
> > intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please
> > immediately return this by email and then delete it.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Marc Prud'hommeaux [mailto:mprudhomapache@gmail.com]
> On Behalf
> >> Of Marc Prud'hommeaux
> >> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:37 PM
> >> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: Artifact names
> >>
> >>
> >> On Apr 24, 2007, at 7:27 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hmm. I wonder if we're really using Maven repositories correctly.
> >>> Do we
> >>> need our dist to be in Maven at all?
> >>
> >> We don't need to. It was just easy to set up that way.
> >>
> >>
> >>> I do think that we should have something that's easy to
> >> depend on that
> >>> pulls in the openjpa-persistence-jdbc module, without
> making people
> >>> have to know about that level of modularity detail.
> >>
> >> Why can't they just depend on openjpa-all? That brings everything
> >> in...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> -Patrick
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Patrick Linskey
> >>> BEA Systems, Inc.
> >>>
> >>
> _____________________________________________________________________
> >> _
> >>> _
> >>> Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> >>> contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
> subsidiaries and
> >>> affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
> >>> copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for
> >>> the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you
> >>> are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in
> >>> error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:05 PM
> >>>> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>>> Subject: Re: Artifact names
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> +1 -- I'd prefer to have the binary / source
> >> uber-archives outside
> >>>> of the Maven repro, though that's more due to convention than
> >>>> anything else.
> >>>>
> >>>> I agree that it's not worth worrying about this for 0.9.7.
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers,
> >>>> Eddie
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 4/24/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> I'm finally getting back to this thread, sorry for the delay.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I got a similar answer from the maven mailing list. Their
> >> stance is
> >>>>> that the maven repository is for artifacts which are used
> >> by maven,
> >>>>> which wouldn't be the same as a final destination for our
> >>>> distribution.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm in favor of moving the source and binary archives to a
> >>>> different
> >>>>> location, if there's a good spot available to us. Does
> >>>> anyone object
> >>>>> to putting the releases somewhere outside of a maven repository?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I don't think this is urgent for the 0.9.7 release since we
> >>>> can't get
> >>>>> rid of the ugly -project names now, but it might be nice
> >> to have a
> >>>>> solution for when OpenJPA graduates.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 4/12/07, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven likes,
> >>>> but when
> >>>>>> we publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for website
> >>>>>> downloads), we name the files as we like.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -dain
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for
> >>>>>>> release 0.9.7.
> >>>>>>> Recently we made changes to remove -project from our
> >>>> the zip file
> >>>>>>> names. The problem is that the maven install and deploy goals
> >>>>>>> ignore the names we provide and generate their own names (
> >>>>>>> openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list
> >>>>>>> archives and it turns out this is a fairly common problem -
> >>>>>>> usually resulting in a response of "working as
> >>>> designed". Here's
> >>>>>>> an example
> >>>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
> >>>>>>> tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project
> back into the
> >>>>>>> names for the 0.9.7 release?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The only other way I know of to fix the names that
> get deployed
> >>>>>>> would be to change the artifactId in the pom files (basically
> >>>>>>> switch openjpa with openjpa-project). Switching the
> names will
> >>>>>>> impact anyone who has a dependency on the base
> openjpa project.
> >>>>>>> They'll have to update the version number anyway, but it will
> >>>>>>> still be a little confusing if they used to depend on
> >>>>>>> openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> -Michael Dick
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> -Michael Dick
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> >>> contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its
> subsidiaries and
> >>> affiliated entities, that may be confidential,
> >> proprietary,
> >>> copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended
> >> solely for the
> >>> use of the individual or entity named in this message. If
> >> you are not
> >>> the intended recipient, and have received this message in error,
> >>> please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries
> > and affiliated entities, that may be confidential,
> proprietary,
> > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended
> solely for the
> > use of the individual or entity named in this message. If
> you are not
> > the intended recipient, and have received this message in error,
> > please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
>
>
Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
Re: Artifact names
Posted by Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org>.
> It's just a bit odd to have the '-all' bit in there. Is it possible to
> make the top-level pom publish the same stuff that openjpa-all
> currently
> does?
Not that I've ever been able to figure out. IIRC, a parent project is
not allowed to depend on child modules, and a child module is not
allowed to rename the artifact that it publishes.
On Apr 24, 2007, at 7:40 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
>>> I do think that we should have something that's easy to
>> depend on that
>>> pulls in the openjpa-persistence-jdbc module, without making people
>>> have to know about that level of modularity detail.
>>
>> Why can't they just depend on openjpa-all? That brings
>> everything in...
>
> It's just a bit odd to have the '-all' bit in there. Is it possible to
> make the top-level pom publish the same stuff that openjpa-all
> currently
> does?
>
> -Patrick
>
> --
> Patrick Linskey
> BEA Systems, Inc.
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _
> Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> contain
> information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and
> affiliated
> entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted
> and/or
> legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the
> individual
> or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended
> recipient,
> and have received this message in error, please immediately return
> this
> by email and then delete it.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Marc Prud'hommeaux [mailto:mprudhomapache@gmail.com] On
>> Behalf Of Marc Prud'hommeaux
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:37 PM
>> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Artifact names
>>
>>
>> On Apr 24, 2007, at 7:27 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
>>
>>> Hmm. I wonder if we're really using Maven repositories correctly.
>>> Do we
>>> need our dist to be in Maven at all?
>>
>> We don't need to. It was just easy to set up that way.
>>
>>
>>> I do think that we should have something that's easy to
>> depend on that
>>> pulls in the openjpa-persistence-jdbc module, without making people
>>> have to know about that level of modularity detail.
>>
>> Why can't they just depend on openjpa-all? That brings
>> everything in...
>>
>>
>>
>>> -Patrick
>>>
>>> --
>>> Patrick Linskey
>>> BEA Systems, Inc.
>>>
>> _____________________________________________________________________
>> _
>>> _
>>> Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
>>> contain
>>> information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and
>>> affiliated
>>> entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted
>>> and/or
>>> legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the
>>> individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the
>>> intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please
>>> immediately return this by email and then delete it.
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:05 PM
>>>> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: Artifact names
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +1 -- I'd prefer to have the binary / source
>> uber-archives outside
>>>> of the Maven repro, though that's more due to convention than
>>>> anything else.
>>>>
>>>> I agree that it's not worth worrying about this for 0.9.7.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Eddie
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 4/24/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I'm finally getting back to this thread, sorry for the delay.
>>>>>
>>>>> I got a similar answer from the maven mailing list. Their
>> stance is
>>>>> that the maven repository is for artifacts which are used
>> by maven,
>>>>> which wouldn't be the same as a final destination for our
>>>> distribution.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm in favor of moving the source and binary archives to a
>>>> different
>>>>> location, if there's a good spot available to us. Does
>>>> anyone object
>>>>> to putting the releases somewhere outside of a maven repository?
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think this is urgent for the 0.9.7 release since we
>>>> can't get
>>>>> rid of the ugly -project names now, but it might be nice
>> to have a
>>>>> solution for when OpenJPA graduates.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/12/07, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven likes,
>>>> but when
>>>>>> we publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for website
>>>>>> downloads), we name the files as we like.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -dain
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for
>>>>>>> release 0.9.7.
>>>>>>> Recently we made changes to remove -project from our
>>>> the zip file
>>>>>>> names. The problem is that the maven install and deploy goals
>>>>>>> ignore the names we provide and generate their own names (
>>>>>>> openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list
>>>>>>> archives and it turns out this is a fairly common problem -
>>>>>>> usually resulting in a response of "working as
>>>> designed". Here's
>>>>>>> an example
>>>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
>>>>>>> tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project back into the
>>>>>>> names for the 0.9.7 release?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The only other way I know of to fix the names that get deployed
>>>>>>> would be to change the artifactId in the pom files (basically
>>>>>>> switch openjpa with openjpa-project). Switching the names will
>>>>>>> impact anyone who has a dependency on the base openjpa project.
>>>>>>> They'll have to update the version number anyway, but it will
>>>>>>> still be a little confusing if they used to depend on
>>>>>>> openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> -Michael Dick
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> -Michael Dick
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
>>> contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries
>>> and affiliated entities, that may be confidential,
>> proprietary,
>>> copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended
>> solely for the
>>> use of the individual or entity named in this message. If
>> you are not
>>> the intended recipient, and have received this message in error,
>>> please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
>>
>>
>
> Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries
> and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
> copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for
> the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you
> are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in
> error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
RE: Artifact names
Posted by Patrick Linskey <pl...@bea.com>.
> > I do think that we should have something that's easy to
> depend on that
> > pulls in the openjpa-persistence-jdbc module, without making people
> > have to know about that level of modularity detail.
>
> Why can't they just depend on openjpa-all? That brings
> everything in...
It's just a bit odd to have the '-all' bit in there. Is it possible to
make the top-level pom publish the same stuff that openjpa-all currently
does?
-Patrick
--
Patrick Linskey
BEA Systems, Inc.
_______________________________________________________________________
Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated
entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or
legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
and have received this message in error, please immediately return this
by email and then delete it.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Prud'hommeaux [mailto:mprudhomapache@gmail.com] On
> Behalf Of Marc Prud'hommeaux
> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:37 PM
> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Artifact names
>
>
> On Apr 24, 2007, at 7:27 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
>
> > Hmm. I wonder if we're really using Maven repositories correctly.
> > Do we
> > need our dist to be in Maven at all?
>
> We don't need to. It was just easy to set up that way.
>
>
> > I do think that we should have something that's easy to
> depend on that
> > pulls in the openjpa-persistence-jdbc module, without making people
> > have to know about that level of modularity detail.
>
> Why can't they just depend on openjpa-all? That brings
> everything in...
>
>
>
> > -Patrick
> >
> > --
> > Patrick Linskey
> > BEA Systems, Inc.
> >
> ______________________________________________________________________
> > _
> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> > contain
> > information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and
> > affiliated
> > entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted
> > and/or
> > legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the
> > individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the
> > intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please
> > immediately return this by email and then delete it.
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:05 PM
> >> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: Artifact names
> >>
> >>
> >> +1 -- I'd prefer to have the binary / source
> uber-archives outside
> >> of the Maven repro, though that's more due to convention than
> >> anything else.
> >>
> >> I agree that it's not worth worrying about this for 0.9.7.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Eddie
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4/24/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> I'm finally getting back to this thread, sorry for the delay.
> >>>
> >>> I got a similar answer from the maven mailing list. Their
> stance is
> >>> that the maven repository is for artifacts which are used
> by maven,
> >>> which wouldn't be the same as a final destination for our
> >> distribution.
> >>>
> >>> I'm in favor of moving the source and binary archives to a
> >> different
> >>> location, if there's a good spot available to us. Does
> >> anyone object
> >>> to putting the releases somewhere outside of a maven repository?
> >>>
> >>> I don't think this is urgent for the 0.9.7 release since we
> >> can't get
> >>> rid of the ugly -project names now, but it might be nice
> to have a
> >>> solution for when OpenJPA graduates.
> >>>
> >>> On 4/12/07, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven likes,
> >> but when
> >>>> we publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for website
> >>>> downloads), we name the files as we like.
> >>>>
> >>>> -dain
> >>>>
> >>>> On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for
> >>>>> release 0.9.7.
> >>>>> Recently we made changes to remove -project from our
> >> the zip file
> >>>>> names. The problem is that the maven install and deploy goals
> >>>>> ignore the names we provide and generate their own names (
> >>>>> openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list
> >>>>> archives and it turns out this is a fairly common problem -
> >>>>> usually resulting in a response of "working as
> >> designed". Here's
> >>>>> an example
> >>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
> >>>>> tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project back into the
> >>>>> names for the 0.9.7 release?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The only other way I know of to fix the names that get deployed
> >>>>> would be to change the artifactId in the pom files (basically
> >>>>> switch openjpa with openjpa-project). Switching the names will
> >>>>> impact anyone who has a dependency on the base openjpa project.
> >>>>> They'll have to update the version number anyway, but it will
> >>>>> still be a little confusing if they used to depend on
> >>>>> openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> -Michael Dick
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> -Michael Dick
> >>>
> >>
> >
> > Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> > contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries
> > and affiliated entities, that may be confidential,
> proprietary,
> > copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended
> solely for the
> > use of the individual or entity named in this message. If
> you are not
> > the intended recipient, and have received this message in error,
> > please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
>
>
Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
Re: Artifact names
Posted by Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org>.
On Apr 24, 2007, at 7:27 PM, Patrick Linskey wrote:
> Hmm. I wonder if we're really using Maven repositories correctly.
> Do we
> need our dist to be in Maven at all?
We don't need to. It was just easy to set up that way.
> I do think that we should have something that's easy to depend on that
> pulls in the openjpa-persistence-jdbc module, without making people
> have
> to know about that level of modularity detail.
Why can't they just depend on openjpa-all? That brings everything in...
> -Patrick
>
> --
> Patrick Linskey
> BEA Systems, Inc.
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _
> Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> contain
> information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and
> affiliated
> entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted
> and/or
> legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the
> individual
> or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended
> recipient,
> and have received this message in error, please immediately return
> this
> by email and then delete it.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:05 PM
>> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Artifact names
>>
>>
>> +1 -- I'd prefer to have the binary / source uber-archives
>> outside of the Maven repro, though that's more due to
>> convention than anything else.
>>
>> I agree that it's not worth worrying about this for 0.9.7.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Eddie
>>
>>
>> On 4/24/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I'm finally getting back to this thread, sorry for the delay.
>>>
>>> I got a similar answer from the maven mailing list. Their stance is
>>> that the maven repository is for artifacts which are used by maven,
>>> which wouldn't be the same as a final destination for our
>> distribution.
>>>
>>> I'm in favor of moving the source and binary archives to a
>> different
>>> location, if there's a good spot available to us. Does
>> anyone object
>>> to putting the releases somewhere outside of a maven repository?
>>>
>>> I don't think this is urgent for the 0.9.7 release since we
>> can't get
>>> rid of the ugly -project names now, but it might be nice to have a
>>> solution for when OpenJPA graduates.
>>>
>>> On 4/12/07, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven likes,
>> but when
>>>> we publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for website
>>>> downloads), we name the files as we like.
>>>>
>>>> -dain
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for
>>>>> release 0.9.7.
>>>>> Recently we made changes to remove -project from our
>> the zip file
>>>>> names. The problem is that the maven install and deploy goals
>>>>> ignore the names we provide and generate their own names (
>>>>> openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
>>>>>
>>>>> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list
>>>>> archives and it turns out this is a fairly common problem -
>>>>> usually resulting in a response of "working as
>> designed". Here's
>>>>> an example
>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
>>>>> tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
>>>>>
>>>>> Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project back into the
>>>>> names for the 0.9.7 release?
>>>>>
>>>>> The only other way I know of to fix the names that get deployed
>>>>> would be to change the artifactId in the pom files (basically
>>>>> switch openjpa with openjpa-project). Switching the names will
>>>>> impact anyone who has a dependency on the base openjpa project.
>>>>> They'll have to update the version number anyway, but it will
>>>>> still be a little confusing if they used to depend on
>>>>> openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> -Michael Dick
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> -Michael Dick
>>>
>>
>
> Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may
> contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries
> and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary,
> copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for
> the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you
> are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in
> error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
RE: Artifact names
Posted by Patrick Linskey <pl...@bea.com>.
Hmm. I wonder if we're really using Maven repositories correctly. Do we
need our dist to be in Maven at all?
I do think that we should have something that's easy to depend on that
pulls in the openjpa-persistence-jdbc module, without making people have
to know about that level of modularity detail.
-Patrick
--
Patrick Linskey
BEA Systems, Inc.
_______________________________________________________________________
Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated
entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or
legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
and have received this message in error, please immediately return this
by email and then delete it.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eddie O'Neil [mailto:ekoneil@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 7:05 PM
> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Artifact names
>
>
> +1 -- I'd prefer to have the binary / source uber-archives
> outside of the Maven repro, though that's more due to
> convention than anything else.
>
> I agree that it's not worth worrying about this for 0.9.7.
>
> Cheers,
> Eddie
>
>
> On 4/24/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm finally getting back to this thread, sorry for the delay.
> >
> > I got a similar answer from the maven mailing list. Their stance is
> > that the maven repository is for artifacts which are used by maven,
> > which wouldn't be the same as a final destination for our
> distribution.
> >
> > I'm in favor of moving the source and binary archives to a
> different
> > location, if there's a good spot available to us. Does
> anyone object
> > to putting the releases somewhere outside of a maven repository?
> >
> > I don't think this is urgent for the 0.9.7 release since we
> can't get
> > rid of the ugly -project names now, but it might be nice to have a
> > solution for when OpenJPA graduates.
> >
> > On 4/12/07, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven likes,
> but when
> > > we publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for website
> > > downloads), we name the files as we like.
> > >
> > > -dain
> > >
> > > On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for
> > > > release 0.9.7.
> > > > Recently we made changes to remove -project from our
> the zip file
> > > > names. The problem is that the maven install and deploy goals
> > > > ignore the names we provide and generate their own names (
> > > > openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
> > > >
> > > > I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list
> > > > archives and it turns out this is a fairly common problem -
> > > > usually resulting in a response of "working as
> designed". Here's
> > > > an example
> > > > http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
> > > > tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
> > > >
> > > > Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project back into the
> > > > names for the 0.9.7 release?
> > > >
> > > > The only other way I know of to fix the names that get deployed
> > > > would be to change the artifactId in the pom files (basically
> > > > switch openjpa with openjpa-project). Switching the names will
> > > > impact anyone who has a dependency on the base openjpa project.
> > > > They'll have to update the version number anyway, but it will
> > > > still be a little confusing if they used to depend on
> > > > openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > -Michael Dick
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > -Michael Dick
> >
>
Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.
Re: Artifact names
Posted by Eddie O'Neil <ek...@gmail.com>.
+1 -- I'd prefer to have the binary / source uber-archives outside
of the Maven repro, though that's more due to convention than anything
else.
I agree that it's not worth worrying about this for 0.9.7.
Cheers,
Eddie
On 4/24/07, Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm finally getting back to this thread, sorry for the delay.
>
> I got a similar answer from the maven mailing list. Their stance is that the
> maven repository is for artifacts which are used by maven, which wouldn't be
> the same as a final destination for our distribution.
>
> I'm in favor of moving the source and binary archives to a different
> location, if there's a good spot available to us. Does anyone object to
> putting the releases somewhere outside of a maven repository?
>
> I don't think this is urgent for the 0.9.7 release since we can't get rid of
> the ugly -project names now, but it might be nice to have a solution for
> when OpenJPA graduates.
>
> On 4/12/07, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
> >
> > In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven likes, but when we
> > publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for website downloads),
> > we name the files as we like.
> >
> > -dain
> >
> > On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for release
> > > 0.9.7.
> > > Recently we made changes to remove -project from our the zip file
> > > names. The
> > > problem is that the maven install and deploy goals ignore the names we
> > > provide and generate their own names (
> > > openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
> > >
> > > I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list archives
> > > and it
> > > turns out this is a fairly common problem - usually resulting in a
> > > response
> > > of "working as designed". Here's an example
> > > http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
> > > tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
> > >
> > > Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project back into the
> > > names for
> > > the 0.9.7 release?
> > >
> > > The only other way I know of to fix the names that get deployed
> > > would be to
> > > change the artifactId in the pom files (basically switch openjpa with
> > > openjpa-project). Switching the names will impact anyone who has a
> > > dependency on the base openjpa project. They'll have to update the
> > > version
> > > number anyway, but it will still be a little confusing if they used to
> > > depend on openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > --
> > > -Michael Dick
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> -Michael Dick
>
Re: Artifact names
Posted by Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com>.
I'm finally getting back to this thread, sorry for the delay.
I got a similar answer from the maven mailing list. Their stance is that the
maven repository is for artifacts which are used by maven, which wouldn't be
the same as a final destination for our distribution.
I'm in favor of moving the source and binary archives to a different
location, if there's a good spot available to us. Does anyone object to
putting the releases somewhere outside of a maven repository?
I don't think this is urgent for the 0.9.7 release since we can't get rid of
the ugly -project names now, but it might be nice to have a solution for
when OpenJPA graduates.
On 4/12/07, Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com> wrote:
>
> In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven likes, but when we
> publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for website downloads),
> we name the files as we like.
>
> -dain
>
> On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for release
> > 0.9.7.
> > Recently we made changes to remove -project from our the zip file
> > names. The
> > problem is that the maven install and deploy goals ignore the names we
> > provide and generate their own names (
> > openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
> >
> > I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list archives
> > and it
> > turns out this is a fairly common problem - usually resulting in a
> > response
> > of "working as designed". Here's an example
> > http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
> > tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
> >
> > Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project back into the
> > names for
> > the 0.9.7 release?
> >
> > The only other way I know of to fix the names that get deployed
> > would be to
> > change the artifactId in the pom files (basically switch openjpa with
> > openjpa-project). Switching the names will impact anyone who has a
> > dependency on the base openjpa project. They'll have to update the
> > version
> > number anyway, but it will still be a little confusing if they used to
> > depend on openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --
> > -Michael Dick
>
>
--
-Michael Dick
Re: Artifact names
Posted by Dain Sundstrom <da...@iq80.com>.
In Geronimo, we publish to the maven repo as maven likes, but when we
publish to the apache distribution mirrors (for website downloads),
we name the files as we like.
-dain
On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for release
> 0.9.7.
> Recently we made changes to remove -project from our the zip file
> names. The
> problem is that the maven install and deploy goals ignore the names we
> provide and generate their own names (
> openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
>
> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list archives
> and it
> turns out this is a fairly common problem - usually resulting in a
> response
> of "working as designed". Here's an example
> http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
> tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
>
> Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project back into the
> names for
> the 0.9.7 release?
>
> The only other way I know of to fix the names that get deployed
> would be to
> change the artifactId in the pom files (basically switch openjpa with
> openjpa-project). Switching the names will impact anyone who has a
> dependency on the base openjpa project. They'll have to update the
> version
> number anyway, but it will still be a little confusing if they used to
> depend on openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> -Michael Dick
Re: Artifact names
Posted by Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com>.
You're right, if / when we bypass the deploy phase and execute scp (or
something similar) ourselves then it'll be easy to put in the renaming
logic.
Thanks Patrick and Marc,
On 4/11/07, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Michael-
>
> I personally think that keeping "-project-" in the artifact zip name
> is tolerable. I too had looked around (albeit briefly) for a solution
> to this a while ago, and found none.
>
> Once OpenJPA is out of incubation and we are deploying releases to
> the Apache mirror system, we'll probably need to put in some more
> deployment-oriented logic that doesn't use the "deploy" phase, so at
> that time we might be able to put in some renaming logic.
>
> +1 for tolerating the artifact name "openjpa-project-0.9.7-
> incubating.zip".
>
>
>
> On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for release
> > 0.9.7.
> > Recently we made changes to remove -project from our the zip file
> > names. The
> > problem is that the maven install and deploy goals ignore the names we
> > provide and generate their own names (
> > openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
> >
> > I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list archives
> > and it
> > turns out this is a fairly common problem - usually resulting in a
> > response
> > of "working as designed". Here's an example
> > http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
> > tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
> >
> > Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project back into the
> > names for
> > the 0.9.7 release?
> >
> > The only other way I know of to fix the names that get deployed
> > would be to
> > change the artifactId in the pom files (basically switch openjpa with
> > openjpa-project). Switching the names will impact anyone who has a
> > dependency on the base openjpa project. They'll have to update the
> > version
> > number anyway, but it will still be a little confusing if they used to
> > depend on openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --
> > -Michael Dick
>
> --
-Michael Dick
Re: Artifact names
Posted by Marc Prud'hommeaux <mp...@apache.org>.
Michael-
I personally think that keeping "-project-" in the artifact zip name
is tolerable. I too had looked around (albeit briefly) for a solution
to this a while ago, and found none.
Once OpenJPA is out of incubation and we are deploying releases to
the Apache mirror system, we'll probably need to put in some more
deployment-oriented logic that doesn't use the "deploy" phase, so at
that time we might be able to put in some renaming logic.
+1 for tolerating the artifact name "openjpa-project-0.9.7-
incubating.zip".
On Apr 11, 2007, at 8:34 AM, Michael Dick wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for release
> 0.9.7.
> Recently we made changes to remove -project from our the zip file
> names. The
> problem is that the maven install and deploy goals ignore the names we
> provide and generate their own names (
> openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
>
> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list archives
> and it
> turns out this is a fairly common problem - usually resulting in a
> response
> of "working as designed". Here's an example
> http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-
> tf1449780s177.html#a3916784
>
> Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project back into the
> names for
> the 0.9.7 release?
>
> The only other way I know of to fix the names that get deployed
> would be to
> change the artifactId in the pom files (basically switch openjpa with
> openjpa-project). Switching the names will impact anyone who has a
> dependency on the base openjpa project. They'll have to update the
> version
> number anyway, but it will still be a little confusing if they used to
> depend on openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> -Michael Dick
Re: Artifact names
Posted by Michael Dick <mi...@gmail.com>.
On 4/11/07, Patrick Linskey <pl...@bea.com> wrote:
>
> > Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project back into
> > the names for
> > the 0.9.7 release?
>
> I don't vehemently object for the 0.9.7 release, but I do vehemently
> object for the 1.0 release. I don't like these random bugs / limitations
> of our build process making their way into the project artifacts.
I agree, I don't think I can resolve it cleanly in a timely manner for
0.9.7but I don't think they should be permanent additions.
> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list
> > archives and it
> > turns out this is a fairly common problem - usually resulting
> > in a response
> > of "working as designed". Here's an example
> > http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-tf1449780s17
> > 7.html#a3916784
>
> Any chance that we can convince the people involved that while it may be
> working as designed, it's a common difficulty?
I'll try. I suspect their argument will be that using the artifactId
guarantees uniqueness in the repository. I think that having the artifactId
in the path is unique enough.
As a last resort we could bite the bullet and switch the artifactIds. It's
not particularly friendly but it wouldn't be the end of the world to make
the change on a major release boundary (hopefully when we leave the
incubator).
-Patrick
>
> --
> Patrick Linskey
> BEA Systems, Inc.
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
> information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated
> entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or
> legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
> or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
> and have received this message in error, please immediately return this
> by email and then delete it.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Michael Dick [mailto:michael.d.dick@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 8:34 AM
> > To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Artifact names
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for
> > release 0.9.7.
> > Recently we made changes to remove -project from our the zip
> > file names. The
> > problem is that the maven install and deploy goals ignore the names we
> > provide and generate their own names (
> > openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
> >
> > I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list
> > archives and it
> > turns out this is a fairly common problem - usually resulting
> > in a response
> > of "working as designed". Here's an example
> > http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-tf1449780s17
> > 7.html#a3916784
> >
> > Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project back into
> > the names for
> > the 0.9.7 release?
> >
> > The only other way I know of to fix the names that get
> > deployed would be to
> > change the artifactId in the pom files (basically switch openjpa with
> > openjpa-project). Switching the names will impact anyone who has a
> > dependency on the base openjpa project. They'll have to
> > update the version
> > number anyway, but it will still be a little confusing if they used to
> > depend on openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > --
> > -Michael Dick
> >
>
> Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
> information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated
> entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or
> legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or
> entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and
> have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email
> and then delete it.
>
--
-Michael Dick
RE: Artifact names
Posted by Patrick Linskey <pl...@bea.com>.
> Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project back into
> the names for
> the 0.9.7 release?
I don't vehemently object for the 0.9.7 release, but I do vehemently
object for the 1.0 release. I don't like these random bugs / limitations
of our build process making their way into the project artifacts.
> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list
> archives and it
> turns out this is a fairly common problem - usually resulting
> in a response
> of "working as designed". Here's an example
> http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-tf1449780s17
> 7.html#a3916784
Any chance that we can convince the people involved that while it may be
working as designed, it's a common difficulty?
-Patrick
--
Patrick Linskey
BEA Systems, Inc.
_______________________________________________________________________
Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain
information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated
entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or
legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient,
and have received this message in error, please immediately return this
by email and then delete it.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Dick [mailto:michael.d.dick@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 8:34 AM
> To: open-jpa-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Artifact names
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm hitting a bit of a snag with the staging repository for
> release 0.9.7.
> Recently we made changes to remove -project from our the zip
> file names. The
> problem is that the maven install and deploy goals ignore the names we
> provide and generate their own names (
> openjpa-project-0.9.7-incubating-xxx.zip).
>
> I searched through the users@maven.apache.org mailing list
> archives and it
> turns out this is a fairly common problem - usually resulting
> in a response
> of "working as designed". Here's an example
> http://www.nabble.com/Installation-and-deployment-tf1449780s17
> 7.html#a3916784
>
> Does anyone vehemently object to putting -project back into
> the names for
> the 0.9.7 release?
>
> The only other way I know of to fix the names that get
> deployed would be to
> change the artifactId in the pom files (basically switch openjpa with
> openjpa-project). Switching the names will impact anyone who has a
> dependency on the base openjpa project. They'll have to
> update the version
> number anyway, but it will still be a little confusing if they used to
> depend on openjpa-0.9.6 and now they depend on openjpa-project-0.9.7.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> -Michael Dick
>
Notice: This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information of BEA Systems, Inc., its subsidiaries and affiliated entities, that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.