Re: [sunxacml-devl] public maven repository containing sunxacml-2.0-M1

[Farrukh N. <fa...@we...>]

On 08/06/2010 04:09 PM, Lennart Jütte wrote:
> Am 06.08.2010 um 22:04 schrieb Kaleb Pederson:
>
>    
>> On Friday, August 06, 2010 12:15:59 pm Farrukh Najmi wrote:
>>      
>>> On 08/06/2010 03:07 PM, Kaleb Pederson wrote:
>>>        
>>>> On Friday, July 30, 2010 11:47:31 am Lennart Jütte wrote:
>>>>
>>>>          
>>>>>> The big change was on how to reference the m2 repo in other projects as
>>>>>> you posted below. Thanks very much!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>              
>>>>> But Kaleb is right: a project shouldn't reference a mirror directly. Maybe there's a better solution?
>>>>>
>>>>>            
>>>> Just a couple of days ago I stumbled across a project that was using svn to host their maven repository. They just created a "mavenrepo" directory along side branches and trunk.  Although it seems a bit strange, it is functional.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> That would be much worse than referencing a mirror IMHO.
>>>        
>> I don't think it's a good solution either, I just referenced it as an additional option since I hadn't seen anybody reference my original suggestion of using SF's web hosting.
>>      
> Oh, i didn't even see this suggestion or forgot about it just after reading.
>
> +1!
>
>    
>>      
>>> I think we
>>> could simply use a variable with a default value referencing one mirror
>>> and anyone can override it to use as a different mirror.
>>>        
>> I'm coming from the point of view of typical developer who only needs a binary.  That developer likely already has a pom to which he just needs to add a dependency (and maybe a repository). In that case, providing a pom with a variable doesn't really help
>>
>> Is there a reason not to use SF's web hosting to host the maven repository? Using their web hosting you can manage all the uploads with ssh/scp using ssh keys and it acts as a standard web server, which is all that maven needs.
>>
>>      

There is no reason not to use the SF's web hosting to host the maven 
repository. The reason why I did it the current way was to have the 
single mvn:deploy take care of the maven repo deployment as well as 
publishing to the Files area in a single action. Seemed like less 
headache to me.

If you guys would prefer to use the web hosting than I can support that 
position. Thanks.

-- 
Regards,
Farrukh

Web: http://www.wellfleetsoftware.com