Go ahead.
Maybe I get the chance to share these thoughts with some people at JavaOne
too.
And let's make a list of third parties we want to contact, direct contact
probably works better than broadcasting.
Robert
On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 12:49:18 +0200, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
I've not see
I've not seen any major issues identified with this scheme (other than
perhaps platformId might be a better name than architectureId)
Will I take a stab at writing this up more formally then?
Should we circulate it more widely?
Did anyone involved with the NMaven effort have any thoughts?
On T
On Friday 2 September 2016, Tibor Digana
wrote:
> @Stephen
> I know that you don't want to have too big change and maven1->maven2 but
> one way or another XML is strictly defined by XSD.
> We must accept that fact to accept a format with more freedom and therefore
> I would prefer code/interface
@Stephen
I know that you don't want to have too big change and maven1->maven2 but
one way or another XML is strictly defined by XSD.
We must accept that fact to accept a format with more freedom and therefore
I would prefer code/interface instead of XML like Groovy script :
*dependencies: ["com.exa
On Friday 2 September 2016, Tibor Digana
wrote:
> @Stephen
> IIUC the 3rd part artifact is a platform (architecture) specific dependency
> for another project. Thus the 3rd party artifact can be a tree of
> dependencies for my project.
> In my imagination some mapping between _architecture_ and
>
@Stephen
IIUC the 3rd part artifact is a platform (architecture) specific dependency
for another project. Thus the 3rd party artifact can be a tree of
dependencies for my project.
In my imagination some mapping between _architecture_ and _dependency_tree_.
>>we need to move Maven forward
RESTful M
) )
>
> Chris
>
>
> Von: Stephen Connolly >
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. September 2016 12:07:18
> An: Maven Developers List
> Betreff: [DISCUSS] Incorporating an ArchitectureId into the GAVCT of the
> repository
>
> One of the t
g, 1. September 2016 12:07:18
An: Maven Developers List
Betreff: [DISCUSS] Incorporating an ArchitectureId into the GAVCT of the
repository
One of the things I feel is necessary to grow Maven in the modelVersion
5.0.0 world is to start taking account of architecture specific artifacts.
Curre
One of the things I feel is necessary to grow Maven in the modelVersion
5.0.0 world is to start taking account of architecture specific artifacts.
Currently, the Maven repository layout does not handle architecture
specific dependencies well.
So, for example:
Say I have a foo.jar that depends on
