Hi GB,
On 09/11/2009, at 12:00 PM, Mr. G Brown wrote:
> Hi people,
>
> The maven archetype creates project pom.xmls which are not very
> portable or robust, because they don't refer to the repositories
> they need.
This will all depend on whether you're wanting to rely on the fake
releases that Henrique publishes ... or your own intranet/build
servers (as is intended).
> And isn't that exactly what maven is supposed to be: A robust
> portable way to build projects?
It is. And it is.
> It would seem (from what little I've read) that to create projects
> which have a portable build, project specific things like special
> repositories (wocommunity) should be put in with the project. One
> should be able to hand the project pom.xml to somebody who doesn't
> know anything about webobjects and maven should be able to build it,
> shouldn't they?
They should, yes. My projects include that info but they don't point
to wocommunity.org.
> Currently the repositories are referenced in ,m2/settings.xml -- is
> that best? Shouldn't the archetypes put in the pom.xml the
> repositories needed to produce the wo-app?
So long as the archetypes are not in the central repository you'll
always need your ~/.m2/settings.xml file so that maven knows where to
pull these additional archetypes from when creating your project.
After that, you can make it self-contained for sure.
However, we could think about providing the repositories config by
default, allowing you to change it or rip it out.
Any objections Henrique?
> I'd be happy to put in a jira, what do you all think?
Sure, please create a JIRA.
with regards,
--Lachlan Deck
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sun Nov 08 2009 - 20:35:19 EST