dkpro-uby
dkpro-uby copied to clipboard
dkpro
Deploy UBY on Sonatype OSS Maven Repository
We should deploy UBY on the Sonatype OSS Maven Repository. This will allow users to
more easily find and use UBY.
Here's what we need to do:
1. Create JIRA tickets requesting creation of Maven repositories
2. Update our POMs so that they no longer suppress deployment on Sonatype
3. Update our POMs to remove references to external repositories, if necessary uploading
the missing third-party artifacts to Maven Central (see <https://docs.sonatype.org/display/Repository/Sonatype+OSS+Maven+Repository+Usage+Guide#SonatypeOSSMavenRepositoryUsageGuide-6.CentralSyncRequirement>
and <https://docs.sonatype.org/display/Repository/Uploading+3rd-party+Artifacts+to+The+Central+Repository>)
4. Update our POMs to conform with Sonatype's requirements at https://docs.sonatype.org/display/Repository/Sonatype+OSS+Maven+Repository+Usage+Guide#SonatypeOSSMavenRepositoryUsageGuide-5.CentralSyncRequirement
-- in particular we probably need <developers>, <licenses>, and <packaging>
elements
6. Stage and deploy releases according to the rest of the instructions at https://docs.sonatype.org/display/Repository/Sonatype+OSS+Maven+Repository+Usage+Guide
7. Update the wiki documentation on Google Code so that it no longer instructs users
to use an external repository
Original issue reported on code.google.com by [email protected] on 2013-11-28 13:38:03
<packaging> is "JAR" be default and shouldn't be necessary.
<licenses> is a god thing to have
<developers> is afaik not really checked, so you can probably leave it out.
Original issue reported on code.google.com by richard.eckart on 2013-11-28 13:42:29
Yes, <packaging> has a default value, but Sonatype wants it explicitly specified anyway.
See their requirements at <https://docs.sonatype.org/display/Repository/Sonatype+OSS+Maven+Repository+Usage+Guide#SonatypeOSSMavenRepositoryUsageGuide-6.CentralSyncRequirement>.
Original issue reported on code.google.com by [email protected] on 2013-11-28 13:50:48
For this, the Uby project should be split into 2 separate projects:
1) one project with the converters
2) one project with the model, API, import/export facilities, UIMA and other stuff
only 2) is going to be deployed on Maven Central
Original issue reported on code.google.com by eckle.kohler on 2013-11-28 13:51:51
- Labels added: Type-Enhancement
- Labels removed: Type-Defect
Judith, can you remind me again why the split needs to occur before deployment on Maven
Central? I am asking because DKPro WSD depends on UBY, so I won't be able to deploy
it on Maven Central until UBY itself is there.
Original issue reported on code.google.com by [email protected] on 2013-11-28 13:55:57
Because the Uby converters depend on many (!!!) projects which are not on Maven Central
yet.
So it would really be a lot of work.
Original issue reported on code.google.com by eckle.kohler on 2013-11-28 14:00:00
@packagings: to my knowledge, this is not checked - just like the developers.
Unless the Nexus system actually rejects artifacts, I'd consider the Sonatype instructions
as guidelines and not as hard requirements. If they really cared for this, they'd set
up the corresponding checks.
@splitting: why would the converters not go to central?
Original issue reported on code.google.com by richard.eckart on 2013-11-28 14:04:51
>> @splitting: why would the converters not go to central?
if I understand it correctly, then step 3:
3. Update our POMs to remove references to external repositories, if necessary uploading
the missing third-party artifacts to Maven Central
turns the deployment of Uby to Maven Central into a larger effort, because Uby (esp
the converters) depends on a number of third-party libraries which are not on Maven
Central yet.
So the idea was to split the effort for the deployment and deploy the Uby API and modules
used more often first. The converters should also go to Maven Central one day in the
future, I think.
Does this make sense?
Original issue reported on code.google.com by eckle.kohler on 2013-11-28 18:53:33
For me yes. I remember now that we had talked about this.
Original issue reported on code.google.com by richard.eckart on 2013-11-28 18:54:29
(No text was entered with this change)
Original issue reported on code.google.com by eckle.kohler on 2014-05-11 12:02:15
- Labels added: Milestone-0.6.0
(No text was entered with this change)
Original issue reported on code.google.com by eckle.kohler on 2014-10-09 17:22:47
(No text was entered with this change)
Original issue reported on code.google.com by eckle.kohler on 2014-10-30 15:37:11
- Labels added: Milestone-0.7.0
- Labels removed: Milestone-0.6.0
(No text was entered with this change)
Original issue reported on code.google.com by chmeyer.de on 2015-04-10 08:57:50
- Labels added: Milestone-0.8.0
- Labels removed: Milestone-0.7.0