Can somebody from the dev team request to have them uploaded or better yet, setup a sync? see http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-central-repository-upload.html

Steve Ebersole wrote: Provided I'm not stepping on anyone's toes by doing so, I'd like to help out with the aforesaid rigmarole until more permanent syncing arrangments can be put into place. As far as the jboss repository is concerned... It contains numerous artifacts with the same ids as things in central - I *hope* these are just duplicates, not subtley different variations. It also in a number of cases contains the same artifact under multiple different group/artifactIds. Altogether, I just don't trust it enough to list it in my POMs. Therefore, I think there's a distinct advantage to getting things into central. I'd go ahead and file an upload request for hibernate-annotations, but there's the question I mentioned earlier in this thread of the javax.persistence:persistence-api:1.0 vs. org.hibernate:ejb3-persistence:1.0.1.GA duality to resolve. Max.

How will having it in central make you trust it more ? It's just as random. That being said, yes the JBoss repository needs to get cleaned up and be more controlled and when that happens someone could simply setup a sync between jboss repository and any other repository...that way we could ensure that the jboss repository at least is in sync. -max

Emmanuel Bernard wrote: The benefit is the ability for a project to depend on Hibernate artifacts without having to have an additional repository enabled. The problem with using an additional repository is first that Maven then checks for not-found artifacts in all enabled repositories (slow), but even more, that it doesn't have any restrictions on which repositories are entitled to supply which artifacts, and once downloaded, there's no record of what repository an artifact came from. So, for example if I happened to have the JBoss repository enabled, I might end up with a subtley different variation of an artifact than a co-worker who was using only central - opening the door to horribly hard-to-debug build reproducability issues. Granted, this is mainly the fault of Maven for having a design that isn't adequate to managing artifacts from multiple sources well, but it's a powerful motivator to stick to just central whereever possible, and to avoid repositories like JBoss which republish artifacts that are also available in central. I totally agree, central's record is rather less-than-stellar here. It wins out mainly because it's the mess that's most people agree on :-/ Thanks. Those TLAs above aren't meant as JIRA keys, are they? One thing that would be great to have cleared up is the ambiguity of HCA version numbers - the same jar is published as both 3.0.0.ga and 3.3.0.ga, whilst in svn trunk, the project is calling itself 3.0.0.GA still - perhaps bump that to 3.4.0.something or 3.3.1.something? Max.

On Mar 16, 2008, at 13:01, Max Bowsher wrote: I don't know who added the dependency to javax.persistence:persistence- api:1.0, I prepare the releases with org.hibernate:ejb3-persistence: 1.0.1.GA. I think in practice these are very similar, but I'd rather have control, it's hard enough to get a TCK working. No need to add even more changing deps in the mix. Note that this dependency is part of your Java EE container anyway so in EE 5 should not be included.