Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [orbit-dev] Discussion on coordinates for uploading of approved artifacts
Thanks for starting Roland!

The only argument I've seen so far for same GAV is people not willing to touch there POMs for IP approved libraries. But then I'm wondering ... do we actually have to manually mirror artifacts from Maven Central in this IP blessed repo? If it's for the sake of independence, i.e. not relying on external sources during build, then a full central mirror already accomplishes that.

Thus, I think we shouldn't have a problem with libraries of same GAV. They would simply be consumed from the central mirror as they are today.

So this leaves us with these two variants:
- modified Maven libraries (eg., subset or patched)
- non Maven hosted libraries

I think in both cases we want different GAVs. In the first case to identify modified content, and in the second to express that we provide Maven artifacts but not the originator.

For Orbit bundles the policy mandates that every modified bundle must use the org.eclipse.orbit namespace.

Option 2 is the preferred one: org.eclipse.orbit + originator simple name. Option 3 was found too excessive.

I propose that we apply option 2 from bundle naming policy to the Maven group ids. Where applicable, the originator simple name can be used to provide further grouping (eg., httpcomponents).

-Gunnar

-- 
Gunnar Wagenknecht
gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, http://guw.io/






On 27 Jan 2017, at 20:36, Roland Grunberg <rgrunber@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I wanted to open a discussion on this topic as it wasn't resolved in Bug
484633 [1].

When the migration to using orbit-recipes was first starting out there was
a discussion on what would happen in the case of artifacts that couldn't be
found on maven central, or that needed to differ beyond the scope of what
ebr-maven-plugin could do. It was determined that we would host a maven
repository of approved artifacts at repo.eclipse.org and they could be
consumed from there.

"- What Maven coordinate should we use for published artifacts?
 (libraries may be different from their original, not in Maven Central at
 all, etc.) (eg., coordinates could incorporate a CQ number)"

From the bug, I agree that if the content is to remain identical then the
GAV should be as well. However, I don't think for the time being we'll be
transferring any artifacts of this case since they can always be used from
maven central.

If the content varies we could make the groupId something like
'org.eclipse.orbit' and then simply match the artifactId/version/classifier
to what it is in maven central and this could work. Maybe we'd run into
issues with poorly named artifactIds (eg. 'core') so we might consider as
Andreas suggested some combination of 'org.eclipse.orbit' combined with the
original groupId. We could even leave the artifactId name up to the
individual committer and only require the groupId be 'org.eclipse.orbit'.

Thoughts on this ?

The process to upload approved artifacts is nearly in place but I just want
to be sure on some conventions as once they're deployed (at least for
release repositories), there doesn't seem to be a way of removing them.

Another thing to consider is whether any decisions we make should be
influenced by the fact that we've been asked before about providing a maven
repository of approved artifacts.


Cheers,
--
Roland Grunberg

[1] https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=484633
_______________________________________________
orbit-dev mailing list
orbit-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/orbit-dev

Back to the top