Re: [iam-dev] Interest in Maven-P2 integration

["Carlos Sanchez" <carlos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

1) starting with file repos for now sounds reasonable to avoid overengineering

2) I'd go with ECF


On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 9:22 AM, Joakim Erdfelt <joakim.erdfelt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Took the first few steps at writing a P2 artifact repository factory
> and provider.
>
> Some things to decide on before I go further.
>
> 1) Do we allow the repository to be modified?
>
> IArtifactFactory has an expectation of GET and PUT of content.
> However, the current SimpleArtifactRepository that ships with P2 has a
> .isModifiable() test for the repository scheme is "file", it only
> allows PUT on file repositories.
>
> We could do the same thing and only allow modifications on file URIs.
> Or we can work with an assumption that we will support WebDAV as well
> from the get go.
> But that leaves other schemes like ftp, cifs, etc... unsupported.
> Which leads to the second question ...
>
> 2) What transport mechanism should we use?
>
> The SimpleArtifactFactory implementation uses ECF for all transport.
> Using ECF ...
> * Allows for a great variety of transport mechanisms,
>   http://wiki.eclipse.org/ECF_Providers#File_Transfer_.28org.eclipse.ecf.filetransfer.29
> * True interactivity with regards to authentication.
> * Vast Proxy support.
> * Progress monitoring during "Software Updates" flow
> * Progress monitoring during Command Line provisioning.
> * And it is the present and future of network communications within Eclipse.
>
> I personally believe that we should use ECF for our communications to
> the repository.
>
> Alternate approaches would be ...
> * Use Wagon
> * Use Mercury
>
> Both of those choices suffer greatly when it comes to Proxy support
> and interactive Authentication.
>
> I'm considering a hybrid approach using maven-artifact along with ECF,
> but I don't know if that is feasible (yet).
>
> - Joakim
>
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Carlos Sanchez
> <carlos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> the problem I see now, and that prevented it from happening before, is
>> getting somebody from p2 committed to help with p2 related questions,
>> and not just interested ;)
>> If we can get that, great, I'd love to see p2 integration.
>>
>>
>> 2008/11/29 Joakim Erdfelt <joakim.erdfelt@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>> There are 2 ways to accomplish this...
>>>
>>> On the repository side, being creative about the p2 metadata creation.
>>>
>>> Providing a maven repo artifact repo resolver.
>>>
>>> I've done the first manually just to see if it was possible, and I've become
>>> pretty familiar with the p2 repository internals in my last job.
>>>
>>> I'd love to help out with this effort.
>>>
>>> My personal goals wrt to IAM is improve WTP/JST support, Search, RAD
>>> support, and general Corporate concerns.  Pencil me in for P2 as well, since
>>> it overlaps with corporate concerns as well.
>>>
>>> -Joakim Erdfelt
>>>
>>> On Nov 29, 2008 10:54 AM, "Abel Muiño Vizcaino" <amuino@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> My perception at Eclipse Summit Europe is that there is a good amount of
>>> interest in Maven/P2 integration.
>>>
>>> I've let people know that we have the P2 integration in our roadmap,
>>> although it is a bit in the future.
>>>
>>> I was wondering if we have the resources to move into P2 integration sooner
>>> (maybe at the expense of PDE integration).
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> Abel
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> iam-dev mailing list
>>> iam-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/iam-dev
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> iam-dev mailing list
>>> iam-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/iam-dev
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> iam-dev mailing list
>> iam-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/iam-dev
>>
> _______________________________________________
> iam-dev mailing list
> iam-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/iam-dev
>