archiva-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "nicolas de loof" <nicolas.del...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Creation of a tag for a stable 'just works' Archiva version
Date Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:07:15 GMT
Even if a maven2 client use archiva with legacy layout, it will ask for the
POM prior to the artifact JAR, so it will read relocations metadata. Not
applying relocation to POM solves the maven1 vs maven2 issue, even if legacy
layout request are used.

My requirement is for 4) as I have lot's of legacy project that use custom
groupId for SUN jars (prior maven had some conventions for them), so I need
lot's of duplicated artifacts in my corporate repo. I'm using an old archiva
snaphsot - with the "/proxy" URL - to have only one "official" JAR.

5) would be great. My snapshot does not even show relocation info from
existing POM in the gui (does the latest build do ?).

Nico.

2007/2/26, Joakim Erdfelt <joakim@erdfelt.com>:
>
> Out of curiosity, what's important ...
>
> 1) Archiva serving up maven 1 (legacy) layout repositories.  (easy / done)
> 2) Archiva conversion of maven 1 repository to maven 2 repository.
> (easy / done)
> 3) Archiva being able to proxy maven 2 content for maven 1 clients.
> (moderate / needs work)
> 4) Archiva being able to serve relocated artifacts to maven 1 clients
> transparently. (moderate / needs work)
> 5) Archiva gui having ability to artifact relocations. (moderate / needs
> work)
>
> Archiva does not know who is connecting to it.
> It could be a maven 1 client, it could be a maven 2 client, it could be
> a user.
>
> If we assume that legacy layout repositories are only served to maven 1
> clients, then we can handle points 3 and 4 above.  But if a maven 2
> client uses the legacy repository, then points 3 and 4 could mask and/or
> hide the relocation warnings on the client side.  Is that behavior
> acceptable?
>
> - Joakim
>
> nicolas de loof wrote:
> > Could you consider my patch to MRM-153 : archiva beeing maven1
> > compliant is
> > required for me as lot's of my project still use maven1 to build.
> >
> > 2007/2/26, Joakim Erdfelt <joakim@erdfelt.com>:
> >>
> >> We are working towards a stable archiva version (alpha) this week.
> >> Stay tuned for the tag or release.
> >>
> >> - Joakim Erdfelt
> >>
> >> Tomek Korzeniewski wrote:
> >> > Greetings to the Archiva Team!
> >> >
> >> > Would it be possible to create a tag in the svn repo of a stable,
> >> 'builds /
> >> > works without problem after checkout', version of Archiva? I've been
> >> looking
> >> > at the dev forum lately and notice that there are a lot of changes
> >> being
> >> > proposed and ones merged from the archiva MRM-239 branch.
> >> >
> >> > After reading the many different wiki entries and posts regarding
> >> getting
> >> > archiva up and running, and the issues users have been having
> >> regarding
> >> > changes made to the trunk I am weary about checking out what is
> >> available at
> >> > the moment.
> >> >
> >> > If you already have something of the sort in the pipeline could you
> >> please
> >> > post your plans.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks in advance.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message