<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 03/15/2012 12:17 PM, Max Rdahl Andersen wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:618B2E33-8711-48CD-A89C-7E40E09EE5FD@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">please stop just replying to me ;)</pre>
</blockquote>
Oops, sorry.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:618B2E33-8711-48CD-A89C-7E40E09EE5FD@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">And sure - if I remove all my mirrors from settings.xml, do not build other plugins than from one specific branch/trunk on my machine with the same ~/.m2/repo in it then you are correct.</pre>
</blockquote>
Having stuff is a settings.xml makes build non portable. It reduces
the control build provider have on dependency management since you
(as a consumer) decided to use other repositories. Having a
settings.xml with repo in it is just like adding stuff to the parent
pom, we cannot guarantee that much with customized pom.xml, it's the
responsability of the user.<br>
<br>
I agree that having a clean repo for each branch is an annoying
step. But that's the only way I know to guarantee build isolation
and consistency (cf Jenkins), and it's working well.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:618B2E33-8711-48CD-A89C-7E40E09EE5FD@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">We build from multiple branches</pre>
</blockquote>
Ok.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:618B2E33-8711-48CD-A89C-7E40E09EE5FD@redhat.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">we want to use mirrors</pre>
</blockquote>
Really? How useful is it? Having customized mirrors in settings.xml
is not very compatible with having strong management of dependency
sources.<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Mickael Istria<br>
Eclipse developer at <a href="http://www.jboss.org/tools">JBoss,
by Red Hat</a><br>
<a href="http://mickaelistria.wordpress.com">My blog</a> - <a
href="http://twitter.com/mickaelistria">My Tweets</a></div>
</body>
</html>