Обсуждение: Publish artifacts to Maven central
Hi,
I would like to help get the jdbc driver jars uploaded to Maven central automatically. I have found a set of Maven Ant tasks that will do the job (http://maven.apache.org/ant-tasks/index.html) and shouldn't disrupt the current Ant script much - except for an additional third party jar containing the tasks, and the changes to create the required jars.
Stephen Nelson
Would it be useful to the project for me to work on this?
Many thanks,
-- Stephen Nelson
Yes, please do. Dave Cramer dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca http://www.credativ.ca On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 6:29 AM, Stephen Nelson <stephen@eccostudio.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to help get the jdbc driver jars uploaded to Maven central > automatically. I have found a set of Maven Ant tasks that will do the job > (http://maven.apache.org/ant-tasks/index.html) and shouldn't disrupt the > current Ant script much - except for an additional third party jar > containing the tasks, and the changes to create the required jars. > > Would it be useful to the project for me to work on this? > > Many thanks, > -- > Stephen Nelson > >
On 10/25/2012 06:29 PM, Stephen Nelson wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to help get the jdbc driver jars uploaded to Maven central > automatically. I have found a set of Maven Ant tasks that will do the > job (http://maven.apache.org/ant-tasks/index.html) and shouldn't disrupt > the current Ant script much - except for an additional third party jar > containing the tasks, and the changes to create the required jars. > > Would it be useful to the project for me to work on this? It really would. I've had it on my to-do for ages, but I haven't done much with Ant and I was concerned about getting the build right for the different versions. -- Craig Ringer
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Craig Ringer <ringerc@ringerc.id.au> wrote: > It really would. I've had it on my to-do for ages, but I haven't done > much with Ant and I was concerned about getting the build right for the > different versions. > Yeah, I finding that to be the slightly more involved part. To get accepted to Maven Central I think you need to supply a jar with javadoc and one with the sources. Looking at the current build there's different source code included depending on the JDBC version you're building for. The question I have is should this current build script handle the building of both versions, or will the script itself be called twice - once for each JDBC version? It could be done either way I think, but I guess this will need to hook into the other automated build discussion happening on another thread so that things work together. > -- > Craig Ringer > > -- Stephen Nelson
Stephen, If the build script is within ant I think you need to call it twice with JAVA_HOME pointed at different JVM's This is probably the simplest as it is easily extended for JAVA 8, and beyond. Dave Cramer dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca http://www.credativ.ca On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Stephen Nelson <stephen@eccostudio.com> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Craig Ringer <ringerc@ringerc.id.au> wrote: >> It really would. I've had it on my to-do for ages, but I haven't done >> much with Ant and I was concerned about getting the build right for the >> different versions. >> > > Yeah, I finding that to be the slightly more involved part. To get > accepted to Maven Central I think you need to supply a jar with > javadoc and one with the sources. Looking at the current build there's > different source code included depending on the JDBC version you're > building for. > > The question I have is should this current build script handle the > building of both versions, or will the script itself be called twice - > once for each JDBC version? It could be done either way I think, but I > guess this will need to hook into the other automated build discussion > happening on another thread so that things work together. > >> -- >> Craig Ringer >> >> > > -- > Stephen Nelson > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc
I am afraid you have to run once for each version. One way is to add one maven pom file for the project and one profile for each version. The real work can be delegated to existing ant job via maven ant plugin. __________________________ Shijun Kong On 10/30/12 11:53 AM, "Stephen Nelson" <stephen@eccostudio.com> wrote: >On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Craig Ringer <ringerc@ringerc.id.au> >wrote: >> It really would. I've had it on my to-do for ages, but I haven't done >> much with Ant and I was concerned about getting the build right for the >> different versions. >> > >Yeah, I finding that to be the slightly more involved part. To get >accepted to Maven Central I think you need to supply a jar with >javadoc and one with the sources. Looking at the current build there's >different source code included depending on the JDBC version you're >building for. > >The question I have is should this current build script handle the >building of both versions, or will the script itself be called twice - >once for each JDBC version? It could be done either way I think, but I >guess this will need to hook into the other automated build discussion >happening on another thread so that things work together. > >> -- >> Craig Ringer >> >> > >-- >Stephen Nelson > > >-- >Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org) >To make changes to your subscription: >http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc This email message and any attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information intended solely for theuse of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or its attachmentsis strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by telephone,fax or email and delete the message and all attachments to the message. Any views or opinions expressed are solelythose of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Investor Analytics LLC.
Did this go anywhere? I don't see anything in the build.xml indicating that any work has been committed (at least on the master branch). Maybe it's sitting in a fork somewhere? I am also happy to help in getting releases pushed to maven central. If there isn't any existing build script work to get them pushed up, I'll knock something up... Cheers Tom On 2 November 2012 05:53, Shijun Kong <skong@investoranalytics.com> wrote: > I am afraid you have to run once for each version. One way is to add one > maven pom file for the project and one profile for each version. The real > work can be delegated to existing ant job via maven ant plugin. > > __________________________ > > Shijun Kong > > > > > > > > On 10/30/12 11:53 AM, "Stephen Nelson" <stephen@eccostudio.com> wrote: > >>On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Craig Ringer <ringerc@ringerc.id.au> >>wrote: >>> It really would. I've had it on my to-do for ages, but I haven't done >>> much with Ant and I was concerned about getting the build right for the >>> different versions. >>> >> >>Yeah, I finding that to be the slightly more involved part. To get >>accepted to Maven Central I think you need to supply a jar with >>javadoc and one with the sources. Looking at the current build there's >>different source code included depending on the JDBC version you're >>building for. >> >>The question I have is should this current build script handle the >>building of both versions, or will the script itself be called twice - >>once for each JDBC version? It could be done either way I think, but I >>guess this will need to hook into the other automated build discussion >>happening on another thread so that things work together. >> >>> -- >>> Craig Ringer >>> >>> >> >>-- >>Stephen Nelson >> >> >>-- >>Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org) >>To make changes to your subscription: >>http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc > > > This email message and any attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information intended solely forthe use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or its attachmentsis strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by telephone,fax or email and delete the message and all attachments to the message. Any views or opinions expressed are solelythose of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Investor Analytics LLC. > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Tom Dunstan <pgsql@tomd.cc> wrote:
Did this go anywhere? I don't see anything in the build.xml indicating
that any work has been committed (at least on the master branch).
Maybe it's sitting in a fork somewhere?
I am also happy to help in getting releases pushed to maven central.
If there isn't any existing build script work to get them pushed up,
I'll knock something up...
Cheers
Tom
Hi Tom
I pushed it to my Github fork of pgjdbc: https://github.com/lordnelson/pgjdbc on the build_script_maven branch.
I'm a bit of a newcomer to Git so hope I've done it correctly? I still need to sort out the gpg signing part so it can be pushed to Maven central automatically, and need some ideas about how to build for each JDBC version.
Stephen
Stephen,
I can take care of building each version. You need a machine with all 3 versions of java on it. I have one. If we can get to the point that it will push one I can probably do the rest.
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 5:00 AM, Stephen Nelson <stephen@eccostudio.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Tom Dunstan <pgsql@tomd.cc> wrote:Did this go anywhere? I don't see anything in the build.xml indicating
that any work has been committed (at least on the master branch).
Maybe it's sitting in a fork somewhere?
I am also happy to help in getting releases pushed to maven central.
If there isn't any existing build script work to get them pushed up,
I'll knock something up...
Cheers
TomHi TomI pushed it to my Github fork of pgjdbc: https://github.com/lordnelson/pgjdbc on the build_script_maven branch.I'm a bit of a newcomer to Git so hope I've done it correctly? I still need to sort out the gpg signing part so it can be pushed to Maven central automatically, and need some ideas about how to build for each JDBC version.Stephen
Stephen,
Can you create a pull request on github. There is a pull request button on your github repo. then send it to me
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 5:00 AM, Stephen Nelson <stephen@eccostudio.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 4:46 AM, Tom Dunstan <pgsql@tomd.cc> wrote:Did this go anywhere? I don't see anything in the build.xml indicating
that any work has been committed (at least on the master branch).
Maybe it's sitting in a fork somewhere?
I am also happy to help in getting releases pushed to maven central.
If there isn't any existing build script work to get them pushed up,
I'll knock something up...
Cheers
TomHi TomI pushed it to my Github fork of pgjdbc: https://github.com/lordnelson/pgjdbc on the build_script_maven branch.I'm a bit of a newcomer to Git so hope I've done it correctly? I still need to sort out the gpg signing part so it can be pushed to Maven central automatically, and need some ideas about how to build for each JDBC version.Stephen
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com> wrote:
Stephen,Can you create a pull request on github. There is a pull request button on your github repo. then send it to me
Hi Dave,
I've created the pull request. I couldn't quite figure out how to squash the commits into one....
Here's the link: https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/pull/39
Many thanks
Stephen
Thanks, this is good
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Stephen Nelson <stephen@eccostudio.com> wrote:
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com> wrote:Stephen,Can you create a pull request on github. There is a pull request button on your github repo. then send it to meHi Dave,I've created the pull request. I couldn't quite figure out how to squash the commits into one....Here's the link: https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/pull/39Many thanksStephen
On 9 February 2013 03:10, Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com> wrote:
Thanks, this is good
Any progress? The latest jdbc drivers are pretty much the only dependencies that I can't pull from maven central these days. I'd love to help, but without the rights to do the push to sonatype I'm not sure what I can do.
Cheers
Tom
Tom,
Yes, I had been struggling with naming conventions.
I would have liked it to go into org/postgreql/jdbc/postgresql-JDBC4-1002.jar
However it appears maven forces
org/postgresql/postgresql/postgresql-JDBC4-1002.jar
I can probably publish the former today.
Dave
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 7:07 AM, Tom Dunstan <pgsql@tomd.cc> wrote:
On 9 February 2013 03:10, Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com> wrote:Thanks, this is goodAny progress? The latest jdbc drivers are pretty much the only dependencies that I can't pull from maven central these days. I'd love to help, but without the rights to do the push to sonatype I'm not sure what I can do.CheersTom
On 4 Apr 2013 13:12, "Dave Cramer" <pg@fastcrypt.com> wrote:
>
> Tom,
>
> Yes, I had been struggling with naming conventions.
>
> I would have liked it to go into org/postgreql/jdbc/postgresql-JDBC4-1002.jar
>
> However it appears maven forces
>
> org/postgresql/postgresql/postgresql-JDBC4-1002.jar
>
> I can probably publish the former today.
>
> Dave
>
> Dave Cramer
>
> dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
> http://www.credativ.ca
>
>
From a Maven developers point of view they're not worried about the directory structure as they just specify group id, artifact id and version in the pom.xml. So you just need to come up with reasonable parameters for each of those.
On 5 April 2013 01:52, Stephen Nelson <stephen@eccostudio.com> wrote:The existing artefacts in maven central have a group id of "postgresql", an artefact id of "postgresql" and a version format of "9.1-901-1.jdbc4". See e.g. http://search.maven.org/#search%7Cgav%7C1%7Cg%3A%22postgresql%22%20AND%20a%3A%22postgresql%22
On 4 Apr 2013 13:12, "Dave Cramer" <pg@fastcrypt.com> wrote:
>
> However it appears maven forces
>
> org/postgresql/postgresql/postgresql-JDBC4-1002.jar
>From a Maven developers point of view they're not worried about the directory structure as they just specify group id, artifact id and version in the pom.xml. So you just need to come up with reasonable parameters for each of those.
Is there a particular reason to change the all of that at this point? I know I personally would probably have made the group "org.postgresql" and the artefact id "jdbc-driver" and maybe specified the jdbc version as a classifier (although some build systems are a bit funny about classifiers). But people have been using the existing group and artefact id, so I don't see much point changing it now.
Cheers
Tom
I've published 9.2 1002 JDBC4 to sonatype he groupid is org.postgresql and the artefact id is postgresql.
I assume this will make it to maven central eventually
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Tom Dunstan <pgsql@tomd.cc> wrote:
On 5 April 2013 01:52, Stephen Nelson <stephen@eccostudio.com> wrote:The existing artefacts in maven central have a group id of "postgresql", an artefact id of "postgresql" and a version format of "9.1-901-1.jdbc4". See e.g. http://search.maven.org/#search%7Cgav%7C1%7Cg%3A%22postgresql%22%20AND%20a%3A%22postgresql%22> However it appears maven forces
>
> org/postgresql/postgresql/postgresql-JDBC4-1002.jar
>From a Maven developers point of view they're not worried about the directory structure as they just specify group id, artifact id and version in the pom.xml. So you just need to come up with reasonable parameters for each of those.
Is there a particular reason to change the all of that at this point? I know I personally would probably have made the group "org.postgresql" and the artefact id "jdbc-driver" and maybe specified the jdbc version as a classifier (although some build systems are a bit funny about classifiers). But people have been using the existing group and artefact id, so I don't see much point changing it now.CheersTom
Hi Dave
I was going to submit a patch for the website to add the maven group id etc to the download page, but it looks like the pgjdbc/www repo on github is out of date.. what's the preferred mechanism for patches to the website?
Cheers
Tom
On 6 April 2013 05:33, Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com> wrote:
I've published 9.2 1002 JDBC4 to sonatype he groupid is org.postgresql and the artefact id is postgresql.I assume this will make it to maven central eventuallyOn Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Tom Dunstan <pgsql@tomd.cc> wrote:On 5 April 2013 01:52, Stephen Nelson <stephen@eccostudio.com> wrote:The existing artefacts in maven central have a group id of "postgresql", an artefact id of "postgresql" and a version format of "9.1-901-1.jdbc4". See e.g. http://search.maven.org/#search%7Cgav%7C1%7Cg%3A%22postgresql%22%20AND%20a%3A%22postgresql%22> However it appears maven forces
>
> org/postgresql/postgresql/postgresql-JDBC4-1002.jar
>From a Maven developers point of view they're not worried about the directory structure as they just specify group id, artifact id and version in the pom.xml. So you just need to come up with reasonable parameters for each of those.
Is there a particular reason to change the all of that at this point? I know I personally would probably have made the group "org.postgresql" and the artefact id "jdbc-driver" and maybe specified the jdbc version as a classifier (although some build systems are a bit funny about classifiers). But people have been using the existing group and artefact id, so I don't see much point changing it now.CheersTom
Tom,
It should be up to date. What are you seeing that suggests otherwise ?
Dave
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Tom Dunstan <pgsql@tomd.cc> wrote:
Hi DaveI was going to submit a patch for the website to add the maven group id etc to the download page, but it looks like the pgjdbc/www repo on github is out of date.. what's the preferred mechanism for patches to the website?CheersTomOn 6 April 2013 05:33, Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com> wrote:I've published 9.2 1002 JDBC4 to sonatype he groupid is org.postgresql and the artefact id is postgresql.I assume this will make it to maven central eventuallyOn Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Tom Dunstan <pgsql@tomd.cc> wrote:On 5 April 2013 01:52, Stephen Nelson <stephen@eccostudio.com> wrote:The existing artefacts in maven central have a group id of "postgresql", an artefact id of "postgresql" and a version format of "9.1-901-1.jdbc4". See e.g. http://search.maven.org/#search%7Cgav%7C1%7Cg%3A%22postgresql%22%20AND%20a%3A%22postgresql%22> However it appears maven forces
>
> org/postgresql/postgresql/postgresql-JDBC4-1002.jar
>From a Maven developers point of view they're not worried about the directory structure as they just specify group id, artifact id and version in the pom.xml. So you just need to come up with reasonable parameters for each of those.
Is there a particular reason to change the all of that at this point? I know I personally would probably have made the group "org.postgresql" and the artefact id "jdbc-driver" and maybe specified the jdbc version as a classifier (although some build systems are a bit funny about classifiers). But people have been using the existing group and artefact id, so I don't see much point changing it now.CheersTom
On 9 April 2013 01:07, Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com> wrote:
It should be up to date. What are you seeing that suggests otherwise ?
Hi Dave
Sorry, should have been more explicit.
The download file seems to still refer to 9.1-902 as the current version, see https://github.com/pgjdbc/www/blob/master/src/documentation/content/xdocs/download.xml
Cheers
Tom
Mostly because I have had difficulty building the site, so I edited the site directly. This is still the reference repo
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 6:58 PM, Tom Dunstan <pgsql@tomd.cc> wrote:
On 9 April 2013 01:07, Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com> wrote:It should be up to date. What are you seeing that suggests otherwise ?Hi DaveSorry, should have been more explicit.The download file seems to still refer to 9.1-902 as the current version, see https://github.com/pgjdbc/www/blob/master/src/documentation/content/xdocs/download.xmlCheersTom
Hi there, not completely related, but somewhat. I'm spreading the word about a plugin for PostgreSQL I started working on: https://github.com/adrianboimvaser/postgresql-maven-plugin. I already released the first version to Maven Central Repository. I also published PostgreSQL 9.2.4 binaries for all platforms under com.github.adrianboimvaser:postgresql-dist. -- View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/Publish-artifacts-to-Maven-central-tp5729586p5756686.html Sent from the PostgreSQL - jdbc mailing list archive at Nabble.com.