[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MRESOLVER-242?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17495980#comment-17495980
]
Hudson commented on MRESOLVER-242:
----------------------------------
Build succeeded in Jenkins: Maven » Maven TLP » maven-resolver » PR-154 #2
See
https://ci-maven.apache.org/job/Maven/job/maven-box/job/maven-resolver/job/PR-154/2/
> When no remote checksums provided by layout, transfer inevitably fails/warns
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MRESOLVER-242
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MRESOLVER-242
> Project: Maven Resolver
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Tamás Cservenák
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 1.8.0
>
>
> On remote transfer, if layout does not provide remote checksums (as Javadoc
> states: it MAY return empty collection), remote transfer either WARNs or
> fails (if repository policy is WARN of FAIL respectively) always. This is
> wrong IMHO.
> OTOH, layout intentionally does not return remote checksums in some cases,
> like GPG signature is, if the default Maven2RepositoryLayoutEx is used.
> Hence, this causes that (sub)artifacts like checksums and signatures are NOT
> resolvable using resolver, due that above (they are deemed to always fail).
> Hence, a proposed solution is:
> * change of semantics: when layout does not provide remote checksums, skip
> checksum validation of remote checksums (as there is no such thing as
> "checksum of a checksum" or in many cases "checksum of a signature").
> * make resolver layout "aware" of signatures, just like it is aware of
> checksums and make them extensible/configurable
> Optionally:
> * implement signing/signature verification services
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
