On 16 Sep 2014, at 11:56, Pete Muir wrote: > On 16 Sep 2014, at 00:27, Max Rydahl Andersen > <max.andersen(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > >> On 9 Sep 2014, at 16:07, Rafael Benevides wrote: >> >>> We also need to check that with JBDS, because it's odd that stacks >>> only >>> uses "redhat-techpreview-all-repository" as additional repository. >> >> because it was the only thing we needed originally. >> >>> Max/Fred, >>> >>> Is there any issues having >>> https://maven.repository.redhat.com/earlyaccess/all/ as declared >>> inside >>> quickstarts pom.xml ? >> >> sorry - but I need to grok when earlyaccess/all is even needed >> before answering that ? :) >> >> My default position would be that if you need earlyaccess you are >> expected to be able to understand why you need it. >> >> But i'm not sure if that is true anymore - hence wanting to ask >> why/when earlyaccess is ever needed ? >> is it for running quickstarts targeting a beta version of EAP ? >> (meaning no snapshots, but actual all releases in it?) > > Right, it’s where we put beta and alpha releases. > >> >> If yes, why doesn't /all get split up in /supported and /earlyaccess >> and /all will serve the combined result ? > > Propose this on the wolf list? Added as topic on tomorrows wolf call: http://pad.engineering.redhat.com/wolf /max /max http://about.me/maxandersen

On 30 Oct 2014, at 22:29, Rafael Benevides wrote: > On 9/22/14 10:54, Max Rydahl Andersen wrote: >> On 16 Sep 2014, at 11:56, Pete Muir wrote: >> >>> On 16 Sep 2014, at 00:27, Max Rydahl Andersen >>> <max.andersen(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >>> >>>> On 9 Sep 2014, at 16:07, Rafael Benevides wrote: >>>> >>>>> We also need to check that with JBDS, because it's odd that >>>>> stacks only >>>>> uses "redhat-techpreview-all-repository" as additional repository. >>>> >>>> because it was the only thing we needed originally. >>>> >>>>> Max/Fred, >>>>> >>>>> Is there any issues having >>>>> https://maven.repository.redhat.com/earlyaccess/all/ as declared >>>>> inside >>>>> quickstarts pom.xml ? >>>> >>>> sorry - but I need to grok when earlyaccess/all is even needed >>>> before answering that ? :) >>>> >>>> My default position would be that if you need earlyaccess you are >>>> expected to be able to understand why you need it. >>>> >>>> But i'm not sure if that is true anymore - hence wanting to ask >>>> why/when earlyaccess is ever needed ? >>>> is it for running quickstarts targeting a beta version of EAP ? >>>> (meaning no snapshots, but actual all releases in it?) >>> >>> Right, it’s where we put beta and alpha releases. >>> >>>> >>>> If yes, why doesn't /all get split up in /supported and >>>> /earlyaccess and /all will serve the combined result ? >>> >>> Propose this on the wolf list? >> >> Added as topic on tomorrows wolf call: >> http://pad.engineering.redhat.com/wolf >> >> /max >> /max >> http://about.me/maxandersen > > Max, > > What was the result of this subject in wolf call ? For now the split would stay, but we remove the /all grouping that was introduced by error (it was a neither or). the final grouping says on line 110 on http://pad.engineering.redhat.com/wolf "Pete and David to follow up offline, fix up mojo doc, and send to list for signoff." I haven't seen this yet. Maybe I missed something while I was on PTO ? > Today I was helping Alexandre Porcelli from BRMS team to setup Ticket > Monster as a demo. But as he had issues with unresolved dependencies > and it seems that he have some restrictions to use the settings.xml > file I'm bringing this subject again to be discussed. 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 but then just make sure once it is releaesed it gets removed which should be fine since then it should be using any earlyaccess bundles, right ?

> Due to his short time to prepare the Demo, he will use Petclinic from > Spring as he found that Ticket Monster is too tricky to build and > run. Maybe he can give us more details/feedback but it was good to > remember that we should improve our JBoss Developer Materials usability.

Agreed. /max http://about.me/maxandersen

> >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 but > >then just make sure once it is releaesed it gets removed which should > >be fine since then it should be using any earlyaccess bundles, right ? Not really, ticket-monster master branch doesn't exist. The closest to master is 2.6.0.Final - https://github.com/jboss-developer/ticket-monster/tree/2.6.0.Final - which is the tight to WFK 2.6.0.GA and all GAVs should be resolvable fromhttp://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/ 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 http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/. If not please advice him to send errors to Vineet or me.

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 a 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: https://twitter.com/arungupta/status/502854638832730112

As I also told Alexandre that we were having this discussion, I invited him to give his feedback on this Thread so he can provide more details. Alexandre, 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 >>> but >>> then just make sure once it is releaesed it gets removed which >>> should >>> be fine since then it should be using any earlyaccess bundles, >>> right ? > Not really, ticket-monster master branch doesn't exist. The closest > to > master is 2.6.0.Final - > https://github.com/jboss-developer/ticket-monster/tree/2.6.0.Final - > which is the tight to WFK 2.6.0.GA and all GAVs should be resolvable > fromhttp://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/ > > 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 > http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/. If not please > advice him to send errors to Vineet or me. > > _______________________________________________ jbossdeveloper mailing list jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper

Le 31 oct. 2014 à 09:34, Vineet Reynolds Pereira <vpereira(a)redhat.com&gt; a écrit : ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Max Rydahl Andersen" <max.andersen(a)redhat.com <mailto:max.andersen@redhat.com>> > To: "Rafael Benevides" <benevides(a)redhat.com <mailto:benevides@redhat.com>> > Cc: jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:jbossdeveloper@lists.jboss.org>, "Alexandre Porcelli" <alexandre.porcelli(a)gmail.com <mailto:alexandre.porcelli@gmail.com>>, "Tomas Repel" > <trepel(a)redhat.com <mailto:trepel@redhat.com>>, "Nikoleta Ziakova" <nziakova(a)redhat.com <mailto:nziakova@redhat.com>> > 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 >> a >> 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: >> https://twitter.com/arungupta/status/502854638832730112 > > so this is a different question. > > Question is if we should add the techpreview/all to > quickstarts/examples. > > 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: https://github.com/jboss-developer/jboss-wfk-quickstarts/blob/2.6.0.Final... <https://github.com/jboss-developer/jboss-wfk-quickstarts/blob/2.6.0.Final... 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. > > /max > >> >> As I also told Alexandre that we were having this discussion, I >> invited >> him to give his feedback on this Thread so he can provide more >> details. >> >> Alexandre, >> >> 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 >>>>> but >>>>> then just make sure once it is releaesed it gets removed which >>>>> should >>>>> be fine since then it should be using any earlyaccess bundles, >>>>> right ? >>> Not really, ticket-monster master branch doesn't exist. The closest >>> to >>> master is 2.6.0.Final - >>> https://github.com/jboss-developer/ticket-monster/tree/2.6.0.Final - >>> which is the tight to WFK 2.6.0.GA and all GAVs should be resolvable >>> fromhttp://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/ >>> >>> 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 >>> http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/. If not please >>> advice him to send errors to Vineet or me. >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> jbossdeveloper mailing list >> jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper > > > /max > http://about.me/maxandersen > _______________________________________________ > jbossdeveloper mailing list > jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper > _______________________________________________ jbossdeveloper mailing list jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:jbossdeveloper@lists.jboss.org> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper>

From: "Max Rydahl Andersen" <manderse(a)redhat.com&gt; To: "Vineet Reynolds Pereira" <vpereira(a)redhat.com&gt; Cc: "Max Rydahl Andersen" <max.andersen(a)redhat.com&gt;, "Tomas Repel" <trepel(a)redhat.com&gt;, jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org, "Alexandre Porcelli" <alexandre.porcelli(a)gmail.com&gt;, "Nikoleta Ziakova" <nziakova(a)redhat.com&gt; Sent: Friday, October 31, 2014 9:14:06 PM Subject: Re: [jbossdeveloper] <repository /> on quickstarts pom.xml Didn't we do inject of these when Productization built them ?

Or was this only done for the archetypes ?

/max http://about.me/maxandersen > On 31 Oct 2014, at 14:36, Vineet Reynolds Pereira <vpereira(a)redhat.com&gt; > wrote: > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Max Rydahl Andersen" <max.andersen(a)redhat.com&gt; >> To: "Rafael Benevides" <benevides(a)redhat.com&gt; >> Cc: jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org, "Alexandre Porcelli" >> <alexandre.porcelli(a)gmail.com&gt;, "Tomas Repel" >> <trepel(a)redhat.com&gt;, "Nikoleta Ziakova" <nziakova(a)redhat.com&gt; >> 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 >>> a >>> 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: >>> https://twitter.com/arungupta/status/502854638832730112 >> >> so this is a different question. >> >> Question is if we should add the techpreview/all to >> quickstarts/examples. >> >> 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: > https://github.com/jboss-developer/jboss-wfk-quickstarts/blob/2.6.0.Final... > > 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. >> >> /max >> >>> >>> As I also told Alexandre that we were having this discussion, I >>> invited >>> him to give his feedback on this Thread so he can provide more >>> details. >>> >>> Alexandre, >>> >>> 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 >>>>>> but >>>>>> then just make sure once it is releaesed it gets removed which >>>>>> should >>>>>> be fine since then it should be using any earlyaccess bundles, >>>>>> right ? >>>> Not really, ticket-monster master branch doesn't exist. The closest >>>> to >>>> master is 2.6.0.Final - >>>> https://github.com/jboss-developer/ticket-monster/tree/2.6.0.Final - >>>> which is the tight to WFK 2.6.0.GA and all GAVs should be resolvable >>>> fromhttp://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/ >>>> >>>> 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 >>>> http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/. If not please >>>> advice him to send errors to Vineet or me. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> jbossdeveloper mailing list >>> jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper >> >> >> /max >> http://about.me/maxandersen >> _______________________________________________ >> jbossdeveloper mailing list >> jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper > _______________________________________________ > jbossdeveloper mailing list > jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper

On 31 Oct 2014, at 17:50, Rafael Benevides <benevides(a)redhat.com&gt; 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 ? > > > > /max > http://about.me/maxandersen > > >> On 31 Oct 2014, at 14:36, Vineet Reynolds Pereira <vpereira(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Max Rydahl Andersen" <max.andersen(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> To: "Rafael Benevides" <benevides(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> Cc: jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org, "Alexandre Porcelli" <alexandre.porcelli(a)gmail.com&gt;, "Tomas Repel" >>> <trepel(a)redhat.com&gt;, "Nikoleta Ziakova" <nziakova(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> 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 >>>> a >>>> 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: >>>> https://twitter.com/arungupta/status/502854638832730112 >>> so this is a different question. >>> >>> Question is if we should add the techpreview/all to >>> quickstarts/examples. >>> >>> 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: >> https://github.com/jboss-developer/jboss-wfk-quickstarts/blob/2.6.0.Final... >> >> 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. >>> >>> /max >>> >>>> As I also told Alexandre that we were having this discussion, I >>>> invited >>>> him to give his feedback on this Thread so he can provide more >>>> details. >>>> >>>> Alexandre, >>>> >>>> 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 >>>>>>> but >>>>>>> then just make sure once it is releaesed it gets removed which >>>>>>> should >>>>>>> be fine since then it should be using any earlyaccess bundles, >>>>>>> right ? >>>>> Not really, ticket-monster master branch doesn't exist. The closest >>>>> to >>>>> master is 2.6.0.Final - >>>>> https://github.com/jboss-developer/ticket-monster/tree/2.6.0.Final - >>>>> which is the tight to WFK 2.6.0.GA and all GAVs should be resolvable >>>>> fromhttp://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/ >>>>> >>>>> 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 >>>>> http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/. If not please >>>>> advice him to send errors to Vineet or me. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> jbossdeveloper mailing list >>>> jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper >>> >>> /max >>> http://about.me/maxandersen >>> _______________________________________________ >>> jbossdeveloper mailing list >>> jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper >> _______________________________________________ >> jbossdeveloper mailing list >> jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper > _______________________________________________ > jbossdeveloper mailing list > jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper

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 ? > > /max > http://about.me/maxandersen > > > On 31 Oct 2014, at 17:50, Rafael Benevides <benevides(a)redhat.com&gt; 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 ? >>> >>> >>> >>> /max >>> http://about.me/maxandersen >>> >>> >>> On 31 Oct 2014, at 14:36, Vineet Reynolds Pereira <vpereira(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> >>>>> From: "Max Rydahl Andersen" <max.andersen(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>> To: "Rafael Benevides" <benevides(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>> Cc: jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org, "Alexandre Porcelli" < >>>>> alexandre.porcelli(a)gmail.com&gt;, "Tomas Repel" >>>>> <trepel(a)redhat.com&gt;, "Nikoleta Ziakova" <nziakova(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>>> 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 >>>>>> a >>>>>> 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: >>>>>> https://twitter.com/arungupta/status/502854638832730112 >>>>>> >>>>> so this is a different question. >>>>> >>>>> Question is if we should add the techpreview/all to >>>>> quickstarts/examples. >>>>> >>>>> 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: >>>> https://github.com/jboss-developer/jboss-wfk- >>>> quickstarts/blob/2.6.0.Final/settings.xml >>>> >>>> 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. >>>>> >>>>> /max >>>>> >>>>> As I also told Alexandre that we were having this discussion, I >>>>>> invited >>>>>> him to give his feedback on this Thread so he can provide more >>>>>> details. >>>>>> >>>>>> Alexandre, >>>>>> >>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>> but >>>>>>>>> then just make sure once it is releaesed it gets removed which >>>>>>>>> should >>>>>>>>> be fine since then it should be using any earlyaccess bundles, >>>>>>>>> right ? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Not really, ticket-monster master branch doesn't exist. The closest >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> master is 2.6.0.Final - >>>>>>> https://github.com/jboss-developer/ticket-monster/tree/2.6.0.Final >>>>>>> - >>>>>>> which is the tight to WFK 2.6.0.GA and all GAVs should be >>>>>>> resolvable >>>>>>> fromhttp://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/. If not please >>>>>>> advice him to send errors to Vineet or me. >>>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> jbossdeveloper mailing list >>>>>> jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper >>>>>> >>>>> /max >>>>> http://about.me/maxandersen >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> jbossdeveloper mailing list >>>>> jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org >>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> jbossdeveloper mailing list >>>> jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> jbossdeveloper mailing list >>> jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper >>> >>

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 > <alexandre.porcelli(a)gmail.com <mailto:alexandre.porcelli@gmail.com>> > 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: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UG4pqk2r70Q > > []s > ___________________ > Alexandre Porcelli > F: +55 11 98159-9725 > http://about.me/porcelli > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Rafael Benevides > <benevides(a)redhat.com <mailto:benevides@redhat.com>> 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 ? > > /max > http://about.me/maxandersen > > > On 31 Oct 2014, at 17:50, Rafael Benevides > <benevides(a)redhat.com <mailto:benevides@redhat.com>> 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 ? > > > > /max > http://about.me/maxandersen > > > On 31 Oct 2014, at 14:36, Vineet Reynolds Pereira > <vpereira(a)redhat.com > <mailto:vpereira@redhat.com>> wrote: > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Max Rydahl Andersen" > <max.andersen(a)redhat.com > <mailto:max.andersen@redhat.com>> > To: "Rafael Benevides" <benevides(a)redhat.com > <mailto:benevides@redhat.com>> > Cc: jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org > <mailto:jbossdeveloper@lists.jboss.org>, > "Alexandre Porcelli" > <alexandre.porcelli(a)gmail.com > <mailto:alexandre.porcelli@gmail.com>>, > "Tomas Repel" > <trepel(a)redhat.com > <mailto:trepel@redhat.com>>, "Nikoleta > Ziakova" <nziakova(a)redhat.com > <mailto:nziakova@redhat.com>> > 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 > a > 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: > https://twitter.com/arungupta/status/502854638832730112 > > so this is a different question. > > Question is if we should add the > techpreview/all to > quickstarts/examples. > > 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: > https://github.com/jboss-developer/jboss-wfk-quickstarts/blob/2.6.0.Final... > > 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. > > /max > > As I also told Alexandre that we were > having this discussion, I > invited > him to give his feedback on this Thread > so he can provide more > details. > > Alexandre, > > 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 > but > then just make sure once it > is releaesed it gets removed > which > should > be fine since then it should > be using any earlyaccess bundles, > right ? > > Not really, ticket-monster master > branch doesn't exist. The closest > to > master is 2.6.0.Final - > https://github.com/jboss-developer/ticket-monster/tree/2.6.0.Final > - > which is the tight to WFK 2.6.0.GA > <http://2.6.0.ga/> and all GAVs > should be resolvable > fromhttp://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/ > <http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/> > > 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 > http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/. > If not please > advice him to send errors to Vineet > or me. > > _______________________________________________ > jbossdeveloper mailing list > jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org > <mailto:jbossdeveloper@lists.jboss.org> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper > > /max > http://about.me/maxandersen > _______________________________________________ > jbossdeveloper mailing list > jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org > <mailto:jbossdeveloper@lists.jboss.org> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper > > _______________________________________________ > jbossdeveloper mailing list > jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org > <mailto:jbossdeveloper@lists.jboss.org> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper > > _______________________________________________ > jbossdeveloper mailing list > jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org > <mailto:jbossdeveloper@lists.jboss.org> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper > > > > _______________________________________________ > jbossdeveloper mailing list > jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:jbossdeveloper@lists.jboss.org> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper _______________________________________________ jbossdeveloper mailing list jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper

Ideally sooner rather than later, but I think it’s too late for EAP 6.4 > On 24 Nov 2014, at 20:15, Sande Gilda <sgilda(a)redhat.com > <mailto:sgilda@redhat.com>> 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. >

I think that the staging repo is the answer here for testing purposes.

I think so, otherwise we won't achieve our objectives to have buildable sources at github.

We use a different process that we have the final versions released previously having the "-build-x" suffix at the version and place those versions at http://jboss-developer.github.io/temp-maven-repo/ repo (which is our "staging" repo until we have a nexus server setup). But I know that this process is particular and couldn't fit for every project. Do you see any restrictions to test the final version using the internal repo and having that repo defined in settings.xml ?

Julian, I would suggest to use maven cli "-s" with settings to your staging repository. Do not inject that into quickstarts, repositories are injected ONLY for public end users. We are advanced users so we should use CLI with a specified settings.xml.

QE should verify the QS with Maven zipped repository files until we have the staging and online Maven repository server by Nexus (yes, that is coming - see Wolf project)

I am a little confused by this discussion. Are we saying we will add the staging repo [1] to the development branch POM files only and we then have to strip them from the product branch POM files? I think it is going to be hard to maintain different POM file contents in different branches. [1] http://jboss-developer.github.io/temp-maven-repo On 11/27/2014 07:15 AM, Rafael Benevides wrote: > On 11/27/14 10:04, Julian Coleman wrote: >> Hi, >> >>> I think that the staging repo is the answer here for testing purposes. >> I think that this makes sense too. However, I'm not sure how we >> will test >> the final version, as that will need a reference to the public >> repository >> and be tested before the public repository contains the artifacts. > We use a different process that we have the final versions released > previously having the "-build-x" suffix at the version and place those > versions at http://jboss-developer.github.io/temp-maven-repo/ repo > (which is our "staging" repo until we have a nexus server setup). But I > know that this process is particular and couldn't fit for every project. > Do you see any restrictions to test the final version using the internal > repo and having that repo defined in settings.xml ? >>> I think so, otherwise we won't achieve our objectives to have >>> buildable >>> sources at github. >> Will it matter if we reference an internal repository in the sources? >> (It won't be possible to build them trivially from outside the Red Hat >> network.) > In that case, that's why we used > http://jboss-developer.github.io/temp-maven-repo/ as a staging maven > repo. >> Thanks, >> >> J >> > _______________________________________________ > jbossdeveloper mailing list > jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper

I have a follow-up question - should we also change the default branch to x.y.Final instead of x.y-develop ? This naturally follows from our need to not have users perform any special configuration to get started. End-users who clone the repo do not have to figure out how to get the SNAPSHOT artifacts. ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Pete Muir" <pmuir(a)redhat.com&gt; > To: "Sande Gilda" <sgilda(a)redhat.com&gt; > Cc: "Max Rydahl Andersen" <max.andersen(a)redhat.com&gt;, jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org, "Alexandre Porcelli" > <alexandre.porcelli(a)gmail.com&gt;, "Tomas Repel" <trepel(a)redhat.com&gt;, "Nikoleta Ziakova" <nziakova(a)redhat.com&gt; > Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 3:51:48 PM > Subject: Re: [jbossdeveloper] <repository /> on quickstarts pom.xml > > Ideally sooner rather than later, but I think it’s too late for EAP 6.4 > > > > > On 24 Nov 2014, at 20:15, Sande Gilda < sgilda(a)redhat.com > 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 < alexandre.porcelli(a)gmail.com > > 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: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UG4pqk2r70Q > > []s > ___________________ > Alexandre Porcelli > F: +55 11 98159-9725 > http://about.me/porcelli > > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Rafael Benevides < benevides(a)redhat.com > > 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 ? > > /max > http://about.me/maxandersen > > > > > On 31 Oct 2014, at 17:50, Rafael Benevides < benevides(a)redhat.com > 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 ? > > > > /max > http://about.me/maxandersen > > > > > On 31 Oct 2014, at 14:36, Vineet Reynolds Pereira < vpereira(a)redhat.com > > wrote: > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Max Rydahl Andersen" < max.andersen(a)redhat.com > > To: "Rafael Benevides" < benevides(a)redhat.com > > Cc: jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org , "Alexandre Porcelli" < > alexandre.porcelli(a)gmail.com >, "Tomas Repel" > < trepel(a)redhat.com >, "Nikoleta Ziakova" < nziakova(a)redhat.com > > 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 > a > 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: > https://twitter.com/arungupta/status/502854638832730112 > so this is a different question. > > Question is if we should add the techpreview/all to > quickstarts/examples. > > 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: > https://github.com/jboss-developer/jboss-wfk-quickstarts/blob/2.6.0.Final... > > 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. > > /max > > > > As I also told Alexandre that we were having this discussion, I > invited > him to give his feedback on this Thread so he can provide more > details. > > Alexandre, > > 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 > but > then just make sure once it is releaesed it gets removed which > should > be fine since then it should be using any earlyaccess bundles, > right ? > Not really, ticket-monster master branch doesn't exist. The closest > to > master is 2.6.0.Final - > https://github.com/jboss-developer/ticket-monster/tree/2.6.0.Final - > which is the tight to WFK 2.6.0.GA and all GAVs should be resolvable > fromhttp:// maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/ > > 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 > http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/ . If not please > advice him to send errors to Vineet or me. > _______________________________________________ > jbossdeveloper mailing list > jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper > /max > http://about.me/maxandersen > _______________________________________________ > jbossdeveloper mailing list > jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper > _______________________________________________ > jbossdeveloper mailing list > jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper > _______________________________________________ > jbossdeveloper mailing list > jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper > > > _______________________________________________ > jbossdeveloper mailing list > jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper > > > > _______________________________________________ > jbossdeveloper mailing list jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper > > > > _______________________________________________ > jbossdeveloper mailing list > jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper _______________________________________________ jbossdeveloper mailing list jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper

On 27 Nov 2014, at 11:49, Rafael Benevides <benevides(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: That's an excellent proposal since we are thinking on users that goes directly to github. Anyway we shouldn't use SNAPSHOTs artifacts on -devel branch. Every "staging" release should be placed at http://jboss-developer.github.io/temp-maven-repo/ using the "-build-x" suffix. That's one of the reasons that I placed that repo as an approved one on QSTools, so we can add it on "-develop" branch. But unfortunately it seems that nobody is using it anymore since it's not being updated since July. Besides that proposal, We also should ask to have the x.y.Final tag for each release. On 11/27/14 08:06, Vineet Reynolds Pereira wrote: > I have a follow-up question - should we also change the default branch to x.y.Final instead of x.y-develop ? > This naturally follows from our need to not have users perform any special configuration to get started. > End-users who clone the repo do not have to figure out how to get the SNAPSHOT artifacts. > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Pete Muir" <pmuir(a)redhat.com&gt; >> To: "Sande Gilda" <sgilda(a)redhat.com&gt; >> Cc: "Max Rydahl Andersen" <max.andersen(a)redhat.com&gt;, jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org, "Alexandre Porcelli" >> <alexandre.porcelli(a)gmail.com&gt;, "Tomas Repel" <trepel(a)redhat.com&gt;, "Nikoleta Ziakova" <nziakova(a)redhat.com&gt; >> Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 3:51:48 PM >> Subject: Re: [jbossdeveloper] <repository /> on quickstarts pom.xml >> >> Ideally sooner rather than later, but I think it’s too late for EAP 6.4 >> >> >> >> >> On 24 Nov 2014, at 20:15, Sande Gilda < sgilda(a)redhat.com > 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 < alexandre.porcelli(a)gmail.com > >> 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: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UG4pqk2r70Q >> >> []s >> ___________________ >> Alexandre Porcelli >> F: +55 11 98159-9725 >> http://about.me/porcelli >> >> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Rafael Benevides < benevides(a)redhat.com > >> 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 ? >> >> /max >> http://about.me/maxandersen >> >> >> >> >> On 31 Oct 2014, at 17:50, Rafael Benevides < benevides(a)redhat.com > 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 ? >> >> >> >> /max >> http://about.me/maxandersen >> >> >> >> >> On 31 Oct 2014, at 14:36, Vineet Reynolds Pereira < vpereira(a)redhat.com > >> wrote: >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> >> From: "Max Rydahl Andersen" < max.andersen(a)redhat.com > >> To: "Rafael Benevides" < benevides(a)redhat.com > >> Cc: jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org , "Alexandre Porcelli" < >> alexandre.porcelli(a)gmail.com >, "Tomas Repel" >> < trepel(a)redhat.com >, "Nikoleta Ziakova" < nziakova(a)redhat.com > >> 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 >> a >> 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: >> https://twitter.com/arungupta/status/502854638832730112 >> so this is a different question. >> >> Question is if we should add the techpreview/all to >> quickstarts/examples. >> >> 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: >> https://github.com/jboss-developer/jboss-wfk-quickstarts/blob/2.6.0.Final... >> >> 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. >> >> /max >> >> >> >> As I also told Alexandre that we were having this discussion, I >> invited >> him to give his feedback on this Thread so he can provide more >> details. >> >> Alexandre, >> >> 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 >> but >> then just make sure once it is releaesed it gets removed which >> should >> be fine since then it should be using any earlyaccess bundles, >> right ? >> Not really, ticket-monster master branch doesn't exist. The closest >> to >> master is 2.6.0.Final - >> https://github.com/jboss-developer/ticket-monster/tree/2.6.0.Final - >> which is the tight to WFK 2.6.0.GA and all GAVs should be resolvable >> fromhttp:// maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/ >> >> 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 >> http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/ . If not please >> advice him to send errors to Vineet or me. >> _______________________________________________ >> jbossdeveloper mailing list >> jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper >> /max >> http://about.me/maxandersen >> _______________________________________________ >> jbossdeveloper mailing list >> jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper >> _______________________________________________ >> jbossdeveloper mailing list >> jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper >> _______________________________________________ >> jbossdeveloper mailing list >> jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> jbossdeveloper mailing list >> jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> jbossdeveloper mailing list jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> jbossdeveloper mailing list >> jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper > _______________________________________________ > jbossdeveloper mailing list > jbossdeveloper(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbossdeveloper

"Pete and David to follow up offline, fix up mojo doc, and send to list for signoff." > > I haven't seen this yet. Maybe I missed something while I was on PTO > ? See David’s email on 26th Sept entitled "[Wolf] /everything folder” - you replied to it on the 1st Oct that reviewing the doc was on your todo list.