im just realizing that if these bom's are not going to be in maven central, the
archetypes also can't be in central...meaning we can't use them fron JBoss Central
since then users would need to add a some mvn repo to even see these first....that
doesn't sound like the user experience we would want or am i missing something (i.e.
will we push archetypes to mvn central but they will generate projects that requires more
than mvn central ?)
/max
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 02:24:56PM -0300, Rafael Benevides wrote:
Hi all,
This email has the intention of clarifying some issues that are appearing as a result of
the "new organization" changes, particularly around BOMs and their versions.
As we now focus on the_products_, we changed the version of the BOMs and Quickstarts to
follow the target_product_ version: EAP 6.2.0, WFK 2.4.0, JDG 6.2.0, etc.
Since the j/boss-javaee-6.0-with-*/ BOMs are now target to its_products_ versions, we
work with the_products_ teams to ensure the right dependency versions of components are
used.
Until we get the Beta or GA versions of these BOMs, we host "developer releases"
(using/-build-x/ suffix) onhttp://jboss-developer.github.io/temp-maven-repo/
We expect to move this repo in the newt few months, to a nexus managed instance
When the product is build, the version will be changed from/-build-x/ suffix
to/-redhat-1/ suffix and when a beta or GA is released will be
inhttp://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/all/
orhttp://maven.repository.redhat.com/earlyaccess/all
We don't intend to sync thehttp://jboss-developer.github.io/temp-maven-repo/ to Maven
Central.
Ok! But some_project_ teams are asking how they should treat their quickstarts given the
fact that the_project_ delivers their quickstarts but the BOMs will not be available on
Maven Central.
We're recommending the_project_ team that have their own_project_ BOMs using
their_project_ GAV. Taking Richfaces and Arquillian as example:
- Richfaces provides their own BOM under the following GAV:
org.richfaces:richfaces-bom:4.3.2.Final
- Arquillian provides their own BOM under the following GAV:
org.jboss.arquillian:arquillian-bom: 1.1.0.Final
- Richfaces is used on WFK 2.4.0 so we wrap the Richfaces BOM under the following
GAV:/org.jboss.bom.wfk: jboss-javaee-6.0-with-richfaces:2.4.0-/...
->https://github.com/jboss-developer/jboss-wfk-boms/blob/master/jboss-javaee-6.0-with-richfaces/pom.xml
- Arquillian is also used on EAP 6.2.0 so we wrap the Arquillian BOM under the following
GAV:/org.jboss.bom.eap: jboss-javaee-6.0-with-tools:6.2.0/-.... ->
https://github.com/jboss-developer/jboss-eap-boms/blob/master/jboss-javae...
As conclusion, we're suggesting that upstream_project_ create BOMs, and then
the_product_ can wrap this BOM under the/org.jboss.bom.<_product_>:
jboss-javaee-6.0-with-<_project_>:<_product_-version>/. This allows for easy
identification of which BOM and version to use for both upstream and_product_."
If you have any further question on how it works, please let me know.
Please, forward to anyone you think that maybe interested in this email content.
Thanks
--
Rafael Benevides | Senior Software Engineer
Red Hat Brazil
+55-61-9269-6576
Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at
redhat.com
_______________________________________________
jdf-dev mailing list
jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev