I'll take that approach. Thanks, Darren
> -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: RE: maven: will I be shot for using systemPath? > From: Jason Bausewein <jason.bausew...@tier3.com> > Date: Mon, August 27, 2012 10:45 am > To: "cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org" > <cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org> > > > +1 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:dk...@apache.org] > Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 8:05 AM > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: maven: will I be shot for using systemPath? > > > On Aug 27, 2012, at 10:54 AM, Darren Shepherd <dar...@godaddy.com> wrote: > > > Olivier, > > > > The jars I'm talking about are things like the F5, Juniper, and VMware > > SDK's. We don't have license rights to put them on a web server > > because were not allowed to redistribute them. So this code will not > > be built by default for Apache CloudStack, but developers working on > > this code will still need some way to build them. I was thinking > > using systemPath was a way to address this, but was curious if you > > have a different approach that is better? > > In general, I would prefer not using systemPath and use normal scoping. Then > include a small script or similar that would execute "mvn > install:install-file" on the various artifacts to populate the local repo > based on the download of the third party things. In an organization, they > COULD just stick artifacts in their Nexus/Archiva instance and it would "just > work" for everyone. > > Dan > > > > > > > I do have one jar, libvirt, that could be put in apache extras. Once > > libvirt gets re-licensed I can put it in apache extras, but currently > > its GPL (or LGPL?) so I'd rather not put it there yet. > > > > Darren > > > > > > > > > >> -------- Original Message -------- > >> Subject: Re: maven: will I be shot for using systemPath? > >> From: Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> > >> Date: Mon, August 27, 2012 3:45 am > >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > >> > >> > >> Created here: > >> https://svn.codespot.com/a/apache-extras.org/cloudstack-extras/m2-rep > >> o/ > >> > >> Give me your google id and then you will have karma. > >> > >> 2012/8/27 Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org>: > >>> 2012/8/27 Darren Shepherd <dar...@godaddy.com>: > >>>> I'm going to submit more maven/waf/ant stuff. One of the things > >>>> right now is that we have non-redistributable jar's in git (and I > >>>> also put them in my custom maven repo, probably shouldn't have done > >>>> that). I need to get rid of those and make building those components > >>>> optional. > >>>> > >>>> So I am currently using systemPath (ie > >>>> <systemPath>${basedir}/../../../deps/cloud-iControl.jar</systemPath > >>>> >) to point to those jar files assuming that if one wants to build > >>>> the non-oss module, then they will download the files them self and > >>>> put them in the expected place. > >>>> > >>>> I know systemPath is frowned upon, but it seemed to me that since > >>>> these jars can't legally be put in a repo (unless the vendor does > >>>> it), it seemed okay? Thoughts? > >>> > >>> Did you think about the solution of apache extras svn repo ? I did > >>> that for an other incubator project see > >>> http://svn.codespot.com/a/apache-extras.org/kalumet-extras/m2-repo/ . > >>> Perso I would prefer that. If you want I can create this space and > >>> give you karma. > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Darren > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Olivier Lamy > >>> Talend: http://coders.talend.com > >>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Olivier Lamy > >> Talend: http://coders.talend.com > >> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > -- > Daniel Kulp > dk...@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog Talend Community Coder - > http://coders.talend.com
