[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SCM-970?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17963819#comment-17963819
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on SCM-970:
------------------------------------
jira-importer commented on issue #1195:
URL: https://github.com/apache/maven-scm/issues/1195#issuecomment-2964654105
**[Robert
Scholte](https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=rfscholte)**
commented
I don't think so. They are 2 completely different types of providers. See
[AbstractScmProvider](https://maven.apache.org/scm/maven-scm-api/apidocs/org/apache/maven/scm/provider/AbstractScmProvider.html)
I'd prefer to have 2 different providers with their own set of calls and
maybe a distributedToCentralized bridge to mimic the same behavior.
> Have separate APIs for distributed and centralized version control
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SCM-970
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SCM-970
> Project: Maven SCM (Moved to GitHub Issues)
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Robert Scholte
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.0.0
>
>
> The nature of these 2 types are very different. The original scm api was
> based on centralized repositories, and the distributed was implemented behind
> those methods, which makes it more complex than required.
> Splitting this will make it easier to make full use of distributed features.
> Keep in mind that plugins like the maven-release-plugin must still be able to
> do their work, but they may need to provide implementations for both tastes
> (unless the original scm-api implements it).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
