0) Ant users do go thru extra steps...no? Technical issues is for Maven folks to address, not our problem. We add extra steps just so that users know what they are getting to (exactly as intended)
1) Is that a maven limitation? I don't remember running into that. Either way, it's for maven to "fix" any issues. 2) Not a problem to be dealt with by this PMC. right? 3) Well, sounds like an enhancement request for maven :) Not really our problem. thanks, -- dims On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 7:05 PM, Jukka Zitting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 12:46 AM, Davanum Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I see where you are going with this. But what i cannot for the life of >> me understand is why adding a tiny snippet of xml to project B's pom >> is so objectionable (adding another repo)? > > You mean adding an extra <repository/> entry for > p.a.o/repo/m2-incubating-repository? > > 0) Except for the technical issues below it simply defeats the purpose > of our current policy. If we allow (or suggest, as we have no direct > control) downstream projects to use such a workaround to avoid the > extra configuration steps, then why should we even have a policy whose > purpose is to make end users go through those extra steps? > > 1) Artifacts that are deployed to the central repository should not > have dependencies that are not included in the central repository. > > 2) AFAIK per-POM <repository/> configurations are being deprecated. > > 3) An extra repository will slow down builds and cause extra network > traffic as Maven checks all configured repositories for missing > dependencies. > > BR, > > Jukka Zitting > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
