You only need distribution management to specify what you deploy to, not where 
you get artifacts from. Very different. Deploying to has none of the issues 
described in the blog entry. This is a good use of the distro mangement section 
and you should put that in a parent pom somewhere and is not a bad thing as you 
are alluding to.

Your solution of svn externals sounds very complicated ;-). I am sure you will 
run into a number of problems with it.

There are also a couple of other issues that the blog discusses that you have 
not mentioned here:

1. If a transitive pom specifies a repository, you are going to hit the 
internet to try and download that dependency and not from your corporate 
repository.

2. Once you put repository information in your pom it is burned there forever. 
So if an artifact moves to another repository, you tags will not build and you 
will have to track down artifacts manually. While this is less of a problem for 
the Enterprise, it can and does happen.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phillip Hellewell [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 1:29 PM
> To: Maven Users List
> Subject: Re: Company-wide settings
> 
> On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 11:07 AM, Thiessen, Todd (Todd)
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Right. The blog entry explains this "bootstrapping" problem quite well.
> 
> I'm not sure I will have the "bootstrap" problem, because I'm thinking
> about having this company pom be in SVN in a directory that all other
> components get automatically upon checkout via svn:externals.
> 
> Since I am treating this pom as a settings file, I don't even care
> about it being in a repository, ever.  In fact, if possible I would
> like to make it impossible for it to get deployed to a repository.  I
> really want it to just be a settings file.
> 
> Of course I'd much rather use the settings.xml for all this, but if I
> have to use a pom to specify the distributionManagement, then why not
> put the repositories in there too, as that keeps them all in the same
> place, will be easier to maintain, and everyone gets updates to it
> automatically.
> 
> If putting repositories in POMs is a "Bad Idea", then I'd argue that
> putting distributionManagement in POMs is a "Bad Idea" too, but for
> some reason the settings.xml doesn't allow distributionManagement in
> there.
> 
> Phillip
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to