Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: >> Yes, I also forsee the pissing contest unfortunately. >> >> Part of the problem is that there are the same artifacts in both >> repositories with differing poms. Which pom is correct? > > I vote for the pom maintained by the dev team behind the project - anything > else is an approximiation. > > I'm not saying our pom's are perfect, but at least they are now actively > maintained.
However, there's also the "Release versions may never change once published" rule, which applies for good reasons: * If released artifacts are changed, builds depending on them are unexpectedly non-reproducible. * If released artifacts are changed, there's no mechanism for updates to happen to local repositories caching the old versions, so some people will see the old version and some the new, indefinitely. Now, arguably, both of the above would best be solved with architectural changes to Maven, but for the moment, strict adherence to "no changes to releases once deployed" is the only way to maintain a modicum of sanity. What would be nice, is for automated syncing of all *new* releases to the jboss repository to be initiated, which surely can't be that controversial? (Though there may be issues where new releases depend on things in the jboss repo that are not in the central repo, but I guess they'll need addressing on a case-by-case basis anyway.) Max.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
