Re: Repository access

Hello Jean-Louis, please create the JIRA, Antoine On Jun 5, 2014, at 3:03 PM, Jean-Louis Boudart wrote: > Same for me is there other repos having same issue? > > We need to create a INFRA jira for this. > > > 2014-06-05 18:08 GMT+02:00 Nicolas Lalevée : > >> I couldn't commit the patch you

Re: Repository access

Same for me is there other repos having same issue? We need to create a INFRA jira for this. 2014-06-05 18:08 GMT+02:00 Nicolas Lalevée : > I couldn't commit the patch you suggested for the ivyde updatesite in svn > either. It must be read only. > > Nicolas > > Le 5 juin 2014 à 07:57, Jan Matèr

Re: Repository access

I couldn't commit the patch you suggested for the ivyde updatesite in svn either. It must be read only. Nicolas Le 5 juin 2014 à 07:57, Jan Matèrne (jhm) a écrit : > After ivyde-updatesite (svn) this is the 2nd repo where I can't commit/push > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/easyant

Re: repository

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Russell Gold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:05:35 +0100, Stefan Bodewig > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > I dont think security checking of Md5 checksums should be >> > voluntary; >> >>

Re: repository

On Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:05:35 +0100, Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I dont think security checking of Md5 checksums should be voluntary; > > While I agree with this in principal, implementing it may be difficult > si

Re: repository

I've just checked in the much reworked repository. We have to be somewhat grateful that whoever broke into my house and stole my work laptop, left the home PC next to it, that being where this code was. Features -now called as it does more than just get them. -now in oata.tasks.repository ; no

Re: repository

Version 0.3 of the dependencies task is now available. It includes repository types and a dependencies-mapper. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: repository

On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Additionally, if the notion of what is a dependency could be > abstracted a bit, it would be great. +1 I could as well depend on IDL artifacts I use to turn into Java sources or XML Schema files or whatever. Stefan --

Re: repository

On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I dont think security checking of Md5 checksums should be voluntary; While I agree with this in principal, implementing it may be difficult since the Maven-like repo at www.apache.org holds .MD5 files (or .md5 or .md5sum) that have

Re: repository

On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Its fairly simple. The only worry is what is our fault handling > strategy; if something says 'no connect', who gets notified? Whoever is supposed to get notified by failed builds 8-) Or less cryptic, just throw a BuildException fr

RE: repository

At 12:31 PM 11/16/2004, you wrote: > From: Russell Gold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 09:06:24 -0600, Dominique Devienne > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Additionally, if the notion of what is a dependency could be abstracted > > a bit, it would be great. I'm not sure it's reaso

Re: repository

On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 11:43:57 -0600, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Do you think that triggering this based on a version of "latest" makes > > the most sense, or do we need a separate nested task or boolean flag? > > I like the version approach except that I hate to make decisions

RE: repository

> From: Russell Gold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 09:06:24 -0600, Dominique Devienne > > but would like timestamp checking for latest-like dependencies that get > > overwritten (which does need a pseudo-atomic copy-to-tmp+move scheme). > > Do you think that triggering this ba

RE: repository

> From: Russell Gold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 09:06:24 -0600, Dominique Devienne > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Additionally, if the notion of what is a dependency could be abstracted > > a bit, it would be great. I'm not sure it's reasonable to ask for this > > now, but

Re: repository

On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 09:06:24 -0600, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > In the end the major difference is a philosophical one. What is the > > central piece of the task, the repository or downloading of files. > > > > I guess I'm mo

Re: repository

On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 09:06:24 -0600, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Additionally, if the notion of what is a dependency could be abstracted > a bit, it would be great. I'm not sure it's reasonable to ask for this > now, but I'm throwing that it now so whatever design decision is mad

RE: repository

> From: Steve Loughran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Which is precisely why every policy has an if attribute that is boolean > > > Hmmm, the old if/unless debate... And we keep on littering the Ant code with duplicated if/unless attributes and the logic/doc associated to them instead of doing

Re: repository

On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:03:07 -0600, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: Steve Loughran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > marks everything for fetch then verifies they were pulled down > > (default policy) only marks absent stuff for downloaded > > marks everything for timestamp-

RE: repository

> From: Steve Loughran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > marks everything for fetch then verifies they were pulled down > (default policy) only marks absent stuff for downloaded > marks everything for timestamp-based-fetch The problem with such an approach is that you have no way to change to on th

Re: repository

oh, and one more thing. I dont think security checking of Md5 checksums should be voluntary; it should be on by default even if we really need https-against-apache.org verification to be secure. It should be built in to the maven repository handler, where it is currently stubbed out. Ideally JA

Re: repository

When I get home, I will check in the current version of the code, which will build and pass existing tests, but not new ones. The key change (apart from new stuff going into tools/ant/tasks/repository (and not optional), is the LibraryPolicy interface, which invokes an entry in the policy handle

RE: repository

"Dominique Devienne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote .. > > From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > In the end the major difference is a philosophical one. What is the > > central piece of the task, the repository or downloading of files. > > > > I guess I'm more on the side of the declarati

RE: repository

> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > In the end the major difference is a philosophical one. What is the > central piece of the task, the repository or downloading of files. > > I guess I'm more on the side of the declarative approach dependencies > takes, but I do want those additi

Re: repository

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Russell Gold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:12:21 +0100, Stefan Bodewig > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Let me take a few steps back and first look at the functionality >> only. We have: >> >> * a local directory holding libraries. (both) >> >> * remote

Re: repository

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:12:21 +0100, Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Russell Gold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > A bit earlier in the thread, I tried to summarize them: > > I've seen that, but then Steve responded with a list of things you > didn't know about yet

Re: repository

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Russell Gold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A bit earlier in the thread, I tried to summarize them: I've seen that, but then Steve responded with a list of things you didn't know about yet. Let me take a few steps back and first look at the functionality only. We have: * a lo

Re: repository

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:49:25 +0100, Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 11 Nov 2004, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I want the opinon of other developers on this topic. > > Let me admit that you've lost me (in particular since I have rather > limited bandwidth ATM

Re: repository

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I want the opinon of other developers on this topic. Let me admit that you've lost me (in particular since I have rather limited bandwidth ATM - where M seems to be months rather than moment). Is there any place I can read up on yo

Re: repository

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 17:53:15 +, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I want the opinon of other developers on this topic. I have an idea. Since this is still new development and presumably there is a fair bit of time until the next ant release, *and* this is a new concept in ant and we

Re: repository

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 17:53:15 +, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 12:20:51 -0500, Russell Gold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Only in the case where two projects simultaneously upgrade to the same > > version of a dependency and are also scheduled to build at the

Re: repository

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 12:20:51 -0500, Russell Gold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 10:08:44 +, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > you dont have a work cruise control server building 5+ projects do you? > > Yes - we either run them one at a time or on separate box

Re: repository

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 10:08:44 +, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 17:36:25 -0500, Russell Gold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sounds like overkill to me (individual users rarely build two projects > > so simultaneously that the scenario is ever likely to arise. >

Re: repository

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 17:36:25 -0500, Russell Gold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 20:32:12 +, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:32:52 -0500, Russell Gold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > That is why I like the maven-style cache. It > > > defi

Re: repository

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 20:32:12 +, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:32:52 -0500, Russell Gold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > That is why I like the maven-style cache. It > > defines an unambiguous name for the cache and unambiguous names for > > each of the files i

Re: repository

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:32:52 -0500, Russell Gold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 17:00:16 +, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I should note that I have been busy changing things, but havent > > committed anything yet as there are no new tests. The new chan

RE: repository

> From: Russell Gold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On the other hand, perhaps the special version "LATEST" should > override that behavior and say that the task should try to pick > whatever version is the latest, and compare its times. This is more > common in at least some styles of internal deve

Re: repository

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 17:00:16 +, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I should note that I have been busy changing things, but havent > committed anything yet as there are no new tests. The new change is IMO, > quite significant, and may change your opinion regardling the limits of > > E

Re: repository

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 11:18:09 -0500, Russell Gold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > After some more thought, I would like to reopen the discussion on this > work. I see that we are trying to solve roughly the same problem > (projects obtaining dependencies from remote repositories) but with a > very dif

Re: repository

After some more thought, I would like to reopen the discussion on this work. I see that we are trying to solve roughly the same problem (projects obtaining dependencies from remote repositories) but with a very different outlook. I think the differences are significant enough to discuss both betwee

Re: repository

On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 19:59:14 +, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > script breaking is always an issue; ant core cannot not break stuff, > especially as we are so very ignorant of so many uses. Note that you > can declare tasks and types into a namespace, though I usually just > declare

Re: repository

On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 17:10:46 +, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 10:24:45 -0500, Russell Gold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2 Nov 2004 21:40:00 +, Steve Loughran > Check out ant, rebuild it, use ; or look in > src//tasks/repository > > no do

RE: repository

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 18:00:43 -0500, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >, I don't like that Steve used HttpClient > to do a simple fetch. does not need it. Yes, HttpClient is > great and all, but I view it as overkill for this, and an undue > dependency, which pulls in yet another dep

Re: repository

My code is currently in the HttpUnit repository. I invite you to take a look: cvs -z3 -d:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cvsroot/httpunit co ant-dependencies I was uncertain about what to define from the jars, as I have found uses for both classpaths and filesets. The approach I took was to enable bot

RE: repository

> From: Matt Benson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > --- Russell Gold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > How does this compare with > > , > > which has been listed on the external tools page > > for several weeks - a task which, when I offered > > it two months

Re: repository

Steve Loughran wrote: ... I must have missed the info on your task; the only one that I knew about was the Krysalis work, and of course Maven itself. I wrote this up fairly quickly and stuck it in to provide a focal point for repository access; this is also why I checked it in before it was working

Re: repository

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 16:14:39 -0400, Russell Gold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 00:17:06 +0100, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I have just committed a repository task. In theory it will support > > repositories other than maven, but there is only maven support r

Re: repository

--- Russell Gold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How does this compare with > , > which has been listed > on the external tools page for several weeks - a > task which, when I > offered it two months ago, was rejected with the > comment that such > tasks

Re: repository

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 00:17:06 +0100, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have just committed a repository task. In theory it will support > repositories other than maven, but there is only maven support right > now. > > > > project="commons-logging" version="1.0.1"/>

Re: repository

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 17:07:05 +0200, Stefan Bodewig > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > -extract proxy info from the current JVM. > > > > HttpClient doesn't hon

Re: repository

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 17:07:05 +0200, Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > -extract proxy info from the current JVM. > > HttpClient doesn't honor the settings would create? I don't think so. I think it does it better (you

Re: repository

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -extract proxy info from the current JVM. HttpClient doesn't honor the settings would create? Any idea whether this is going to work/compile against HttpClient 3.0alpha. I'd like to add it to Gump, of course. We have two differe

Re: repository

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 03:18:11 +0200, Stephen McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Steve Loughran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 26 October 2004 01:17 > > To: Ant Developers List > > Subject: repository > > > > > > I have just committed a repository

Re: repository

Steve Loughran wrote: I have just committed a repository task. In theory it will support repositories other than maven, but there is only maven support right now. Still to do: -a good security model. Verifying MD5 on the ibiblio site is inadequate. -extract proxy info from the current

RE: repository

> -Original Message- > From: Steve Loughran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 26 October 2004 01:17 > To: Ant Developers List > Subject: repository > > > I have just committed a repository task. In theory it will support > repositories other than maven, but there is only maven support r