After working on a PoC, I prepared QSTools to inject the <repository /> definition in a separated profile as we do for Archetypes: https://github.com/jboss-developer/jboss-eap-archetypes/blob/6.4.x-develop/jboss-javaee6-webapp-archetype/jboss-repositories-webapp.diff

QSTools ticket: https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JDF-762

But after placing http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/ at the Quickstarts, I realized that we won't solve the user experience issues without adding - https://maven.repository.redhat.com/earlyaccess/ and
- http://jboss-developer.github.io/temp-maven-repo/ also
for the -develop branch.

This will generate a management issue because those extra repos will need to be removed for Quickstarts .GA distribution.

If we instruct contributors to place the earlyaccess and temp-maven-repo on settings.xml and add techpreview to pom.xml it can become confusing.

Summary: I think that injecting <repository /> would be nice but it will bring an extra management effort and/or some sort of confusion. So it has more cons than pros.

Well, JBDS already brings a Wizard to customize the settings.xml. I think that CLI users have the expertise to know that it's probably a missing configuration than a Quickstarts bug.

Maybe we need to think a little bit more on other solutions for this issue for CLI users.

Em 8/27/14, 12:18, Pete Muir escreveu:
I think it is simpler to put the repo in the POM. We have to explain either approach to our users, so we should go with the simpler to explain and understand.

On 27 Aug 2014, at 13:29, Paul Robinson <paul.robinson@redhat.com> wrote:

Pete,

You mentioned this week that you no longer think the maven plugin was a good idea. What's your thinking now?

On 27 Aug 2014, at 12:52, Sande Gilda <sgilda@redhat.com> wrote:

Pete suggested this approach last fall. I will forward that email.

Rafael, separately I am also forwarding the email discussed the cons of 
adding the <repository/> to the POM files. :-)


On 08/27/2014 04:32 AM, Darran Lofthouse wrote:
Wonder if there is any maven plug in that can output a nice message if 
a condition is not met.

Regards,
Darran Lofthouse.


On 26/08/14 22:27, Rafael Benevides wrote:
Em 8/26/14, 17:56, Sande Gilda escreveu:
So they, like me, don't RTFM? :-)
ahahahah
I didn't realize it was an issue. Who is fielding the complaints for
this? I haven't been aware of any. And is it primarily people who use
the Maven command line or JDBS?
I believe that it comes mostly by people using CLI since JBDS helps 
on this.

This $subject was reborn by a request from Arun Gupta. It seems that
someone tried to use our Quickstarts and had issues because e forgot to
RTFM :)
Wouldn't it be easier to try to make the Maven setting configuration
requirements more prominent? I really don't like the idea of adding
the Maven repository to the POM files and then telling them it's not a
good practice. If they see something, they will repeat it because, as
you said, they don't read the instructions. The whole purpose of the
quickstarts is to show how to code using best practices.
It's the kind of relax thing that I don't think we will regret because
it has the advantages that I mentioned. Besides the "not being
recommended" I don't see any potential issues for us.

I remember that you sent me  (more than a year ago) some URLs that
mention the cons on having <repository /> on pom.xml file. Do you mind
sharing it again ?

Thanks

On 08/26/2014 04:44 PM, Rafael Benevides wrote:
The problem that we're trying to solve is that users don't read the
instructions :)

So, they don't know that they have to configure the settings.xml until
they face a build problem.

Em 8/26/14, 14:33, Sande Gilda escreveu:
Sorry, I'm just back from PTO and catching up on this thread.

I have run the quickstarts using both command line and JDBS without
running into any problems, so I'm not really clear what problem we 
are
trying to solve. Are there issues with asking the user to 
configure the
settings.xml file with the content we provide?

I'm adding Paul and Nikoleta to the thread to see how this might 
impact
the quickstart testing and release process.

On 08/26/2014 05:27 AM, Pete Muir wrote:
On 26 Aug 2014, at 10:26, Paul Robinson <paul.robinson@redhat.com>
wrote:

On 26 Aug 2014, at 10:18, Pete Muir <pmuir@redhat.com> wrote:

On 26 Aug 2014, at 09:27, Paul Robinson
<paul.robinson@redhat.com> wrote:

Rafael,

It'd be worth reading the "[Wolf] Revisting embedding
repositories in POMs for developer materials" thread on
enterprise-maven-list@redhat.com. There was quite a bit of
discussion about doing this. The general opinion was that it
would be a huge win for usability, but there are quite a few
subtle problems with the approach. For example, productization
are currently stripping off these repository definitions from
quickstarts, so any solution is going to need to work for them.
We don’t currently put any repo definitions in quickstarts...
Sorry, I should have been clearer. Productization would remove
them if they exist. Quote from Julian Coleman:

    Right.  Note, also, that the vman tool will strip out the
<repositories>
    from the POM files that it processes.  This means that all POM
files for
    the IP builds (FSW/DV/BPMS) will not contain repositories.
So, adding
    this information to settings.xml seems the only sensible 
option.
Not all platforms use vman afaik.

Pete came up with an alternative approach that helps to educate
the developer about the configuration, in a better way then we
have ATM (expecting them to read the docs). This approach was to
include a plugin (that lives in maven central). This plugin
would detect missing dependencies that would be available had
the correct repository been defined in the settings.xml. There
might also be an option to fix the configuration automatically?
I’m not so sure about this any more.

Paul.

On 25 Aug 2014, at 13:50, Rafael Benevides
<benevides@redhat.com> wrote:

Hi all,

On a look for a continuous improvement on developer user
experience and also because we have been constantly asked to
support issues related to the setup of
https://access.redhat.com/maven-repository to make the
quickstarts work, we want to include the <repository />
definition on quickstarts pom.xml

Actually the Archetypes already have the <repository /> on the
pom.xml file of the generated project.

The idea here is to have the <repository /> with the
https://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/ defined on
every quickstarts's pom.xml file with a comment on top of it
saying that this approach is not recommended but we included it
so users can test the quickstarts without further setup and
that it's recommended to use settings.xml.

It will bring the following advantages:
- It will make ease to contributors and users
- Simplify the build.
- Simplify the Archetype synch process / No need to inject the
repo since it will come from the Quickstarts
- We can add a pre-defined comment above the pom.xml repository
definition to explain that we don't recommend that.
- We can also add this "comment" to QSTools to check/fix it.

As a roadmap for it:
- We need to document that at the
https://github.com/jboss-developer/jboss-developer-shared-resources 


- We need to update the contributing guides
- We need to update QSTools to do this update on all
quickstarts for us.

Max, Is there any restrictions on JBDS side ?

Anyone else have any objections/comments on this $subject ?

Thanks
-- 

Rafael Benevides | Senior Software Engineer
JBoss Developer
M: +55-61-9269-6576

<{a8aabf3a-4467-4e37-9bc5-48b1d7b494a2}_LATAM_RedHat.jpg>

Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community
collaboration.
See how it works at www.redhat.com

<linkedin.png> <youtube.png>
_______________________________________________
jbossdeveloper mailing list
jbossdeveloper@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper
Paul.

-- 
Paul Robinson
JBoss Developer Team Lead (www.jboss.org)

JBoss, a Division of Red Hat
Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No.
03798903
Directors:Michael Cunningham (US), Charles Peters (US), Matt
Parson (US), Paul Hickey (Ireland)

_______________________________________________
jbossdeveloper mailing list
jbossdeveloper@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper
Paul.

-- 
Paul Robinson
JBoss Developer Team Lead (www.jboss.org)

JBoss, a Division of Red Hat
Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No.
03798903
Directors:Michael Cunningham (US), Charles Peters (US), Matt
Parson (US), Paul Hickey (Ireland)
_______________________________________________
jbossdeveloper mailing list
jbossdeveloper@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper
_______________________________________________
jbossdeveloper mailing list
jbossdeveloper@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper
_______________________________________________
jbossdeveloper mailing list
jbossdeveloper@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper

              
_______________________________________________
jbossdeveloper mailing list
jbossdeveloper@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper


          
_______________________________________________
jbossdeveloper mailing list
jbossdeveloper@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper

Paul.

-- 
Paul Robinson
JBoss Developer Team Lead (www.jboss.org)

JBoss, a Division of Red Hat
Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 03798903
Directors:Michael Cunningham (US), Charles Peters (US), Matt Parson (US), Paul Hickey (Ireland)