Actually,
taking to womaven-dev for further discussion.
On 09/11/2009, at 12:34 PM, Lachlan Deck wrote:
> 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
>
with regards,
--Lachlan Deck
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Sun Nov 08 2009 - 20:38:44 EST