Ideally sooner rather than later, but I think itís too late for EAP 6.4

On 24 Nov 2014, at 20:15, Sande Gilda <> wrote:

What is the timeline for this? Am I supposed to do this for the JBoss EAP 6.4 quickstarts or for the EAP 7 release? I think it will have a pretty big QE impact. Plus, this change not only impacts the quickstarts, but the documentation.

On 11/17/2014 06:00 AM, Pete Muir wrote:
Agreed, and it was this logic that led to us deciding to introduce the repo into the POM.

On 11 Nov 2014, at 14:37, Alexandre Porcelli <> wrote:

Sorry for my late reply... I was on PTO (in fact I return tomorrow)

First of all... I understand all the reasoning behind the issues that makes us avoid use maven central for our stuff, I'm also a seasoned developer with good expirience on maven config - so touch my settings.xml isn't a problem, or even change myself some POMs wouldn't be a problem too.

So what's the problem? Simplicity (or lack of it)! If Ticketmonster is our `petclinic`, we should make it easy to build and deploy as spring's petclinic is... git clone; mvn clean install and done!

Ticketmonster uses a default branch called "2.7.x-develop" (after cloning and I had to double check if I did anything wrong... I questioned myself if I cloned the right project; if i had changed branches accidently; and finally if 2.7.x was really the latest version); then I tried to build, no pom.xml on the root (fine, it was quick to find the real sources directory); finally I run the build (tried the innocent `mvn clean install`) - and got lots of error messages. You can arguee that I didn't follow the tutorial... and you're right! But how many developers are also skiping the tutorial and are trying to build the app directly? How many people we're loosing on this process?

If we want to make our technology accessible to people, we should try to make it simple as possible... we should try to remove all barriers, and make our things as easy to consume as others are doing.

btw: I was trying to use ticketmonster to record a demo of our UberFire based Web IDE:

Alexandre Porcelli
F: +55 11 98159-9725

On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Rafael Benevides <> wrote:
We stopped at which repos should be included.

Them in the other email thread I proposed to have a list of approved repos and its id, them QSTools can be used to update those repo definitions.

On 10/31/14 15:07, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
Anything holding us back for doing it for quick starts and ticketmonster?

I feel we had this discussion in past but I only remember "just not done yet" ...or was there something beyond that ?


On 31 Oct 2014, at 17:50, Rafael Benevides <> wrote:

This was only done for the archetypes

On 10/31/14 13:44, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
Didn't we do inject of these when Productization built them ?

Or was this only done for the archetypes ?


On 31 Oct 2014, at 14:36, Vineet Reynolds Pereira <> wrote:

----- Original Message -----
From: "Max Rydahl Andersen" <>
To: "Rafael Benevides" <>
Cc:, "Alexandre Porcelli" <>, "Tomas Repel"
<>, "Nikoleta Ziakova" <>
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2014 6:53:43 PM
Subject: Re: [jbossdeveloper] <repository /> on quickstarts pom.xml

On 31 Oct 2014, at 13:58, Rafael Benevides wrote:

I know which dependencies were causing the build to fail and where to
find them, but it seems that Alexandre wanted to show users how to run
project as easy as clone, build and run.

If I'm not wrong, this discussion started with similar issues in this
Arun Gupta Twitter thread:
so this is a different question.

Question is if we should add the techpreview/all to

Not about earlyaccess.

And afaik we already did this for quickstarts with a clear warning,
right ?
AFAIK, they're not in the POM of the quickstarts. A settings.xml is supplied instead:

But, that would deflect the original question on whether we should add it to POM.
Honestly, I dont mind adding it, with the warning that for a real-world project, the repo should instead be in the settings.xml.

Thus if ticketmonster does not have that in there I would say it would
make sense to add it
with similar warning/text as the quickstarts.


As I also told Alexandre that we were having this discussion, I
him to give his feedback on this Thread so he can provide more


Do you mind to share your restrictions and perceptions about the build
process ?

On 10/31/14 06:47, Marek Novotny wrote:
What restrictions does he have ?

And I guess the issue here is ticketmonster master needs the
earlyaccess bits ?

I think ticketmonster master could add the earlyaccess to its pom
then just make sure once it is releaesed it gets removed which
be fine since then it should be using any earlyaccess bundles,
right ?
Not really, ticket-monster master branch doesn't exist. The closest
master is 2.6.0.Final -  -
which is the tight to WFK 2.6.0.GA and all GAVs should be resolvable

I think that Rafael knows that 2.7.x-develop is unstable and includes
internal product GAVs which are not in all or earlyaccess.

So if Alexandre uses 2.6.0.Final branch/tag he should get it to work
just with online redhat repository If not please
advice him to send errors to Vineet or me.
jbossdeveloper mailing list
jbossdeveloper mailing list
jbossdeveloper mailing list
jbossdeveloper mailing list

jbossdeveloper mailing list

jbossdeveloper mailing list