From usersvictoria21@example.net Mon Sep 06 02:49:54 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 19278 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2010 02:49:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 6 Sep 2010 02:49:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 97192 invoked by uid 500); 6 Sep 2010 02:49:53 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 96956 invoked by uid 500); 6 Sep 2010 02:49:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.archiva.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: moderator for victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 17562 invoked by uid 99); 3 Sep 2010 12:59:46 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) X-PGP-Universal: processed; by ifuniversal.ifdsgroup.co.uk on Fri, 03 Sep 2010 13:55:59 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0 Subject: Missing Unprocessed Artifacts Scanning Options Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2010 13:59:16 +0100 Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Missing Unprocessed Artifacts Scanning Options Thread-Index: ActLZ6zlvIymHYzoQvGU6V4KeBb3/g== From: "August, Mark" <victoria21@example.net> To: <victoria21@example.net> content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Having upgraded from Archiva 1.0.1 to 1.3.1 I can now no longer see some = of the "Database - Unprocessed Artifacts Scanning" options on the databas= e page. Does anyone know how to fix this? I have installed Archiva as a w= eb application under Tomcat 6. Many Thanks Mark=20 INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL DATA SERVICES (UK) LTD Tel: {{PHONE+SOCIAL_SECURITY_NUMBER}} ********************** N O T I C E ********************************* This message and any attachments is intended only for the individual or company to which it is addressed and may contain information which is = privileged, confidential or prohibited from disclosure or unauthorised us= e.=20 If the recipient of this transmission is not the intended recipient, or t= he=20 employee or agent responsible for delivering such materials to the intend= ed=20 recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, any form of reproduction= ,=20 dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, distribution and/or=20 publication of this e-mail message or its attachments other than by it's = intended recipient is strictly prohibited by the sender. If you have rece= ived it in error, please notify us immediately by telephone on the number abov= e and=20 destroy the message and all copies in your possession. International Financial Data Services (UK) Limited (Company No. 02669935)= =20is=20 authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority. Both International Financial Data Services (UK) Limited and International= =20Financial=20 Data Services Limited (Company No. 02763682) are registered in England wi= th their=20 registered offices at IFDS House, St Nicholas Lane, Basildon Essex SS15 5= FS. In the interest of the environment, please do not print this email unless= =20it is absolutely necessary.=20 From usersvictoria21@example.net Tue Sep 07 23:36:18 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 55866 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2010 23:36:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 7 Sep 2010 23:36:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 8937 invoked by uid 500); 7 Sep 2010 23:36:18 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 8874 invoked by uid 500); 7 Sep 2010 23:36:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.archiva.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 8866 invoked by uid 99); 7 Sep 2010 23:36:16 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 07 Sep 2010 23:36:16 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO msg1.disney.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 07 Sep 2010 23:35:51 +0000 Received: from int1.disney.pvt (int1.disney.pvt [83.161.120.155]) by msg1.disney.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o87NZT4x018264 for <victoria21@example.net>; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 23:35:29 GMT Received: from sm-cala-xht02.swna.wdpr.disney.com (SM-CALA-XHT02.swna.wdpr.disney.com [83.161.120.155]) by int1.disney.pvt (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o87NZTHX032621 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <victoria21@example.net>; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 23:35:29 GMT Received: from sm-cala-vxmb06a.swna.wdpr.disney.com ([888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a48920:73be:eaf5:e3af]) by sm-cala-xht02.swna.wdpr.disney.com ([888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a49907:f811]) with mapi; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 16:35:29 -0700 From: "Shelley, Ryan" <victoria21@example.net> To: "'victoria21@example.net'" <victoria21@example.net> Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 16:35:28 -0700 Subject: Upgrading from 1.1 Thread-Topic: Upgrading from 1.1 Thread-Index: ActO5VqH2uUpjv+vRrWrq4Pefl2bxQ== Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4CAB09168F7ECF4F9F513AF2DC0E62EE15762144A3SMCALAVXMB06A_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Source-IP: SM-CALA-XHT02.swna.wdpr.disney.com [83.161.120.155] X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --_000_4CAB09168F7ECF4F9F513AF2DC0E62EE15762144A3SMCALAVXMB06A_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hey folks, I'm reading up on how to upgrade from 1.1 to 1.3.1. We currently have a pr= oblem where snapshots aren't being removed and I read that a bug was fixed = to address this. However, the documentation to upgrade to 1.3 is a little vague regarding up= dating the field lengths in the derby DB. I'm following the documentation = here: http://archiva.apache.org/docs/1.3.1/adminguide/upgrade.html "If upgrading from a version lower than 1.2.2, you might also need to alter= the lengths of the above fields as there is no upgrade task currently avai= lable for this." How is it recommended that I do this? I've got the Derby "ij" console runn= ing but the JNDI configuration in jetty.xml reads: <Set name=3D"url">jdbc:derby:<SystemProperty name=3D"appserver.base" defaul= t=3D".."/>/data/databases/archiva</Set> There is no port, so I've tried a few options, but so far I always get "Con= nection refused". These are the connect driver/urls I've tried (where "<se= rver>" is the hostname to my server running Archiva): ij> connect 'jdbc:derby://<server>/data/databases/archiva'; ij> connect 'jdbc:derby://<server>:1527/data/databases/archiva'; Any suggestions? Thanks! Ryan Shelley --_000_4CAB09168F7ECF4F9F513AF2DC0E62EE15762144A3SMCALAVXMB06A_-- From usersvictoria21@example.net Wed Sep 08 00:37:54 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 75687 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2010 00:37:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 8 Sep 2010 00:37:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 44775 invoked by uid 500); 8 Sep 2010 00:37:53 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 44704 invoked by uid 500); 8 Sep 2010 00:37:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.archiva.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 44696 invoked by uid 99); 8 Sep 2010 00:37:52 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 00:37:52 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-fx0-f42.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 00:37:47 +0000 Received: by fxm14 with SMTP id 14so4057764fxm.15 for <victoria21@example.net>; Tue, 07 Sep 2010 17:37:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=u24dSexkuBVCxW3nb24z6fCl/jzyZFMELR5/bdayNYk=; b=NvrmneZndb+YAlbN5f2Hd8a9w67CS9gPptSGEfXCxRNe8KJsVyGtRV0RnusNCUnmES 3SMTCPkFg7RMqlb3LgQtFryk86Xibpqq+r6Yyu4AMWlBTsw7o9Ru2nBOHWt5WXnW440S aPmxawz08/oo5clSIBcPz8nJKFegc8OTdYiqQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=mjZaLWJ+CEMCDCS91o1TbLaO3vZYGWMfiGfUFKURJeZJ8sdTllQKJMPac9XmiqeD7L xjx0p7+3VcSWXFVCcbbn9nhYMqJR/t3NqEWXefSqksdneTARCUOkyOOgTPWYFhZ5DbOD nZ6wTgJjeYMMQ6OcSJU2C9MjftnpcVoHX7iG0= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id w7mr232193hbe.210.1283906246214; Tue, 07 Sep 2010 17:37:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 17:37:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> From: Wendy Smoak <victoria21@example.net> Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 20:37:06 -0400 Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> Subject: Re: Upgrading from 1.1 To: victoria21@example.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 7:35 PM, Shelley, Ryan <victoria21@example.net> wro= te: > Hey folks, > > I'm reading up on how to upgrade from 1.1 to 1.3.1. =A0We currently have = a problem where snapshots aren't being removed and I read that a bug was fi= xed to address this. > However, the documentation to upgrade to 1.3 is a little vague regarding = updating the field lengths in the derby DB. =A0I'm following the documentat= ion here: > http://archiva.apache.org/docs/1.3.1/adminguide/upgrade.html By far the easiest thing to do is just delete the database and let Archiva re-create it. (I think you need to delete the entire directory, not just the contents.) Will that work for you? --=20 Wendy From usersvictoria21@example.net Wed Sep 08 00:39:52 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 75823 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2010 00:39:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 8 Sep 2010 00:39:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 45359 invoked by uid 500); 8 Sep 2010 00:39:51 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 45288 invoked by uid 500); 8 Sep 2010 00:39:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.archiva.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 45278 invoked by uid 99); 8 Sep 2010 00:39:50 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 00:39:50 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO msg3.disney.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 00:39:43 +0000 Received: from int2.disney.pvt (int2.disney.pvt [83.161.120.155]) by msg3.disney.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o880dMMF028954 for <victoria21@example.net>; Wed, 8 Sep 2010 00:39:22 GMT Received: from sm-cala-xht01.swna.wdpr.disney.com (SM-CALA-XHT01.swna.wdpr.disney.com [83.161.120.155]) by int2.disney.pvt (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o880dMPV027072 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <victoria21@example.net>; Wed, 8 Sep 2010 00:39:22 GMT Received: from sm-cala-vxmb06a.swna.wdpr.disney.com ([888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a48920:73be:eaf5:e3af]) by sm-cala-xht01.swna.wdpr.disney.com ([888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a49907:f810]) with mapi; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 17:39:22 -0700 From: "Shelley, Ryan" <victoria21@example.net> To: "'victoria21@example.net'" <victoria21@example.net> Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 17:39:21 -0700 Subject: RE: Upgrading from 1.1 Thread-Topic: Upgrading from 1.1 Thread-Index: ActO7hSlUBrY/NXVREqdU7qOPOIBWAAAAycg Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Source-IP: SM-CALA-XHT01.swna.wdpr.disney.com [83.161.120.155] Would I have to re-configure everything after the upgrade? Repositories an= d Users, etc? -Ryan -----Original Message----- From: Wendy Smoak [mailto:victoria21@example.net]=20 Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 5:37 PM To: victoria21@example.net Subject: Re: Upgrading from 1.1 On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 7:35 PM, Shelley, Ryan <victoria21@example.net> wro= te: > Hey folks, > > I'm reading up on how to upgrade from 1.1 to 1.3.1. =A0We currently have = a problem where snapshots aren't being removed and I read that a bug was fi= xed to address this. > However, the documentation to upgrade to 1.3 is a little vague regarding = updating the field lengths in the derby DB. =A0I'm following the documentat= ion here: > http://archiva.apache.org/docs/1.3.1/adminguide/upgrade.html By far the easiest thing to do is just delete the database and let Archiva re-create it. (I think you need to delete the entire directory, not just the contents.) Will that work for you? --=20 Wendy From usersvictoria21@example.net Wed Sep 08 01:05:13 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 85539 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2010 01:05:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 8 Sep 2010 01:05:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 73771 invoked by uid 500); 8 Sep 2010 01:05:12 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 73595 invoked by uid 500); 8 Sep 2010 01:05:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.archiva.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 73584 invoked by uid 99); 8 Sep 2010 01:05:11 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 01:05:11 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-fx0-f42.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 01:04:49 +0000 Received: by fxm14 with SMTP id 14so4068999fxm.15 for <victoria21@example.net>; Tue, 07 Sep 2010 18:04:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=CC6Niu4ZCKtzzv8rMvje192PW/ADIMH2PyKK88l7BUI=; b=l+P20q3h9wg5RgTUfRHRUPz4AWfztXumVxUCfRJNTnlwCCPuQKovnKz52i06nQZ76Y Zk4UWJjpTnwns8tepyUScYReOyEoPVTBPk7O5HPbcj8wnNWJpWAXWT/8tphC6yqU00fe HDoqnwdEnX58tQg7HpVe4qjMNwHtkQ5h8pxfY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=RB0FFKXesXgyfqJlCnqczgk9OxenpwKmRGHJjLwqadF8qzHYynQK91rduuzTkgYWQw lbjLj1KrVCUcxr37n935KK2WW+uxkuaaMv8u4saveotRpt1wURb7nOtKMpcQiOOx2e6Q jwdLUrm+JSUvnlGV8LEkhrrFk1/H/8z22Kdfg= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id 6mr322561hbt.142.1283907869318; Tue, 07 Sep 2010 18:04:29 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 18:04:09 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> From: Wendy Smoak <victoria21@example.net> Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 21:04:09 -0400 Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> Subject: Re: Upgrading from 1.1 To: victoria21@example.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Shelley, Ryan <victoria21@example.net> wro= te: > Would I have to re-configure everything after the upgrade? =A0Repositorie= s and Users, etc? No, that's stored elsewhere. There is a separate user database, don't delete that one. The configuration is in archiva.xml in newer versions. I'm not that familiar with 1.1 to be honest. The database has the info for the .../browse/... urls, which it can re-construct when it scans all the poms. Now that I think of it, you'll probably want to delete the indexes also (in the .index directory?) and let it rebuild those as well. -- Wendy From usersvictoria21@example.net Wed Sep 08 01:28:03 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 89475 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2010 01:28:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 8 Sep 2010 01:28:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 91613 invoked by uid 500); 8 Sep 2010 01:28:03 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 91553 invoked by uid 500); 8 Sep 2010 01:28:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.archiva.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 91545 invoked by uid 99); 8 Sep 2010 01:28:02 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 01:28:02 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO msg1.disney.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 01:27:55 +0000 Received: from int2.disney.pvt (int2.disney.pvt [83.161.120.155]) by msg1.disney.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o881RYnF000673 for <victoria21@example.net>; Wed, 8 Sep 2010 01:27:35 GMT Received: from sm-cala-xht02.swna.wdpr.disney.com (SM-CALA-XHT02.swna.wdpr.disney.com [83.161.120.155]) by int2.disney.pvt (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o881RY4l020228 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <victoria21@example.net>; Wed, 8 Sep 2010 01:27:34 GMT Received: from sm-cala-vxmb06a.swna.wdpr.disney.com ([888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a48920:73be:eaf5:e3af]) by sm-cala-xht02.swna.wdpr.disney.com ([888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a49907:f811]) with mapi; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 18:27:34 -0700 From: "Shelley, Ryan" <victoria21@example.net> To: "'victoria21@example.net'" <victoria21@example.net> Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 18:26:06 -0700 Subject: RE: Upgrading from 1.1 Thread-Topic: Upgrading from 1.1 Thread-Index: ActO8edubvMjg7jYS9mABaasiL3RHwAAnX/A Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Source-IP: SM-CALA-XHT02.swna.wdpr.disney.com [83.161.120.155] Ok, I'll give that a try. One last question. If we have the repository sc= an set to delete snapshots older than 30 days or 5 snapshots, which takes p= recedence? Say I have 100 snapshots evenly spaced out across 40 days. I'm= assuming after the purge, I'd have 30 days worth of snapshots and the 5 sn= apshot count doesn't come into play? I'm thinking we have our snapshot ret= ention set too high, as well. Thanks from the prompt response, Wendy. Much appreciated! -Ryan -----Original Message----- From: Wendy Smoak [mailto:victoria21@example.net]=20 Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 6:04 PM To: victoria21@example.net Subject: Re: Upgrading from 1.1 On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Shelley, Ryan <victoria21@example.net> wro= te: > Would I have to re-configure everything after the upgrade? =A0Repositorie= s and Users, etc? No, that's stored elsewhere. There is a separate user database, don't delete that one. The configuration is in archiva.xml in newer versions. I'm not that familiar with 1.1 to be honest. The database has the info for the .../browse/... urls, which it can re-construct when it scans all the poms. Now that I think of it, you'll probably want to delete the indexes also (in the .index directory?) and let it rebuild those as well. -- Wendy From usersvictoria21@example.net Wed Sep 08 04:03:16 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 23348 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2010 04:03:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 8 Sep 2010 04:03:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 5781 invoked by uid 500); 8 Sep 2010 04:03:14 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 4101 invoked by uid 500); 8 Sep 2010 04:03:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.archiva.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 4093 invoked by uid 99); 8 Sep 2010 04:03:10 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 04:03:10 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-pz0-f42.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 04:03:03 +0000 Received: by pzk30 with SMTP id 30so3184807pzk.15 for <victoria21@example.net>; Tue, 07 Sep 2010 21:02:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id a8mr737730wac.159.1283918561319; Tue, 07 Sep 2010 21:02:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [83.161.120.155] ([83.161.120.155]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d39sm14766177wam.16.283.161.120.155.02.38 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 07 Sep 2010 21:02:39 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Brett Porter <victoria21@example.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Subject: Re: Upgrading from 1.1 From: Brett Porter <victoria21@example.net> In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 14:02:35 +1000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> To: victoria21@example.net X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org =46rom = http://archiva.apache.org/docs/1.3.1/adminguide/repositories.html: > Please take note that the by number of days old criteria is activated = by default (set to 100 days). In order to de-activate it and use the by = retention count criteria, you must set the Repository Purge By Days = Older field to 0. Another thing to note here is that if the by number of = days old criteria is activated, the retention count would still be = respected (See the Repository Purge By Days Older section below for more = details) but not the other way around. So in your case, it'll keep the greater of the last 30 days worth, or = the last 5 snapshots. - Brett On 08/09/2010, at 11:26 AM, Shelley, Ryan wrote: > Ok, I'll give that a try. One last question. If we have the = repository scan set to delete snapshots older than 30 days or 5 = snapshots, which takes precedence? Say I have 100 snapshots evenly = spaced out across 40 days. I'm assuming after the purge, I'd have 30 = days worth of snapshots and the 5 snapshot count doesn't come into play? = I'm thinking we have our snapshot retention set too high, as well. >=20 > Thanks from the prompt response, Wendy. Much appreciated! >=20 > -Ryan >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Wendy Smoak [mailto:victoria21@example.net]=20 > Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 6:04 PM > To: victoria21@example.net > Subject: Re: Upgrading from 1.1 >=20 > On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Shelley, Ryan = <victoria21@example.net> wrote: >> Would I have to re-configure everything after the upgrade? = Repositories and Users, etc? >=20 > No, that's stored elsewhere. There is a separate user database, don't > delete that one. The configuration is in archiva.xml in newer > versions. I'm not that familiar with 1.1 to be honest. >=20 > The database has the info for the .../browse/... urls, which it can > re-construct when it scans all the poms. >=20 > Now that I think of it, you'll probably want to delete the indexes > also (in the .index directory?) and let it rebuild those as well. >=20 > -- > Wendy -- Brett Porter victoria21@example.net http://brettporter.wordpress.com/ From usersvictoria21@example.net Wed Sep 08 04:39:47 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 32751 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2010 04:39:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 8 Sep 2010 04:39:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 34156 invoked by uid 500); 8 Sep 2010 04:39:46 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 33913 invoked by uid 500); 8 Sep 2010 04:39:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.archiva.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 33905 invoked by uid 99); 8 Sep 2010 04:39:43 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 04:39:43 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO msg3.disney.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 04:39:34 +0000 Received: from int2.disney.pvt (int2.disney.pvt [83.161.120.155]) by msg3.disney.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o884dCxh013175 for <victoria21@example.net>; Wed, 8 Sep 2010 04:39:13 GMT Received: from sm-cala-xht01.swna.wdpr.disney.com (SM-CALA-XHT01.swna.wdpr.disney.com [83.161.120.155]) by int2.disney.pvt (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o884dCT1032222 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <victoria21@example.net>; Wed, 8 Sep 2010 04:39:12 GMT Received: from sm-cala-vxmb06a.swna.wdpr.disney.com ([888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a48920:73be:eaf5:e3af]) by sm-cala-xht01.swna.wdpr.disney.com ([888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a49907:f810]) with mapi; Tue, 7 Sep 2010 21:39:12 -0700 From: "Shelley, Ryan" <victoria21@example.net> To: "'victoria21@example.net'" <victoria21@example.net> Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 21:39:07 -0700 Subject: RE: Upgrading from 1.1 Thread-Topic: Upgrading from 1.1 Thread-Index: ActPCscAwJ6IMe03T4KzCb7ExpakAAABOrRg Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Source-IP: SM-CALA-XHT01.swna.wdpr.disney.com [83.161.120.155] X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Thanks Brett... I appreciate the clarification! -----Original Message----- From: Brett Porter [mailto:victoria21@example.net] On Behalf Of Brett Porter Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 9:03 PM To: victoria21@example.net Subject: Re: Upgrading from 1.1 >From http://archiva.apache.org/docs/1.3.1/adminguide/repositories.html: > Please take note that the by number of days old criteria is activated by = default (set to 100 days). In order to de-activate it and use the by retent= ion count criteria, you must set the Repository Purge By Days Older field t= o 0. Another thing to note here is that if the by number of days old criter= ia is activated, the retention count would still be respected (See the Repo= sitory Purge By Days Older section below for more details) but not the othe= r way around. So in your case, it'll keep the greater of the last 30 days worth, or the l= ast 5 snapshots. - Brett On 08/09/2010, at 11:26 AM, Shelley, Ryan wrote: > Ok, I'll give that a try. One last question. If we have the repository = scan set to delete snapshots older than 30 days or 5 snapshots, which takes= precedence? Say I have 100 snapshots evenly spaced out across 40 days. I= 'm assuming after the purge, I'd have 30 days worth of snapshots and the 5 = snapshot count doesn't come into play? I'm thinking we have our snapshot r= etention set too high, as well. >=20 > Thanks from the prompt response, Wendy. Much appreciated! >=20 > -Ryan >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Wendy Smoak [mailto:victoria21@example.net]=20 > Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 6:04 PM > To: victoria21@example.net > Subject: Re: Upgrading from 1.1 >=20 > On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Shelley, Ryan <victoria21@example.net> w= rote: >> Would I have to re-configure everything after the upgrade? Repositories= and Users, etc? >=20 > No, that's stored elsewhere. There is a separate user database, don't > delete that one. The configuration is in archiva.xml in newer > versions. I'm not that familiar with 1.1 to be honest. >=20 > The database has the info for the .../browse/... urls, which it can > re-construct when it scans all the poms. >=20 > Now that I think of it, you'll probably want to delete the indexes > also (in the .index directory?) and let it rebuild those as well. >=20 > -- > Wendy -- Brett Porter victoria21@example.net http://brettporter.wordpress.com/ From usersvictoria21@example.net Wed Sep 08 18:03:05 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 95734 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2010 18:03:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 8 Sep 2010 18:03:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 46996 invoked by uid 500); 8 Sep 2010 18:03:04 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 46899 invoked by uid 500); 8 Sep 2010 18:03:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.archiva.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 46891 invoked by uid 99); 8 Sep 2010 18:03:03 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 18:03:03 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO msg3.disney.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 18:02:40 +0000 Received: from int1.disney.pvt (int1.disney.pvt [83.161.120.155]) by msg3.disney.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o88I2FCZ030897 for <victoria21@example.net>; Wed, 8 Sep 2010 18:02:15 GMT Received: from sm-cala-xht03.swna.wdpr.disney.com (SM-CALA-XHT03.swna.wdpr.disney.com [83.161.120.155]) by int1.disney.pvt (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o88I2E7w028314 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <victoria21@example.net>; Wed, 8 Sep 2010 18:02:15 GMT Received: from sm-cala-vxmb06a.swna.wdpr.disney.com ([888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a48920:73be:eaf5:e3af]) by sm-cala-xht03.swna.wdpr.disney.com ([888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a49907:f812]) with mapi; Wed, 8 Sep 2010 11:02:14 -0700 From: "Shelley, Ryan" <victoria21@example.net> To: "'victoria21@example.net'" <victoria21@example.net> Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 11:00:11 -0700 Subject: RE: Upgrading from 1.1 Thread-Topic: Upgrading from 1.1 Thread-Index: ActO8edubvMjg7jYS9mABaasiL3RHwAjU3MA Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Source-IP: SM-CALA-XHT03.swna.wdpr.disney.com [83.161.120.155] X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Just to follow-up, I have completed my upgrade from 1.1 to 1.3.1 without pr= oblems. I shut down Archiva, backed up my data directory, removed the "archiva" dat= abase directory, removed the ".index" directories in the repositories, unta= rred the new archiva release, copied only the "archiva.xml" configuration o= ver, moved the data directory over, then restarted Archiva. After restart,= I re-ran the Repository Scans and Database Scan to rebuild the indexes and= clean things up. Maven builds seem to be running just fine against the ne= w version. Thanks for your input Wendy! -Ryan -----Original Message----- From: Wendy Smoak [mailto:victoria21@example.net]=20 Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 6:04 PM To: victoria21@example.net Subject: Re: Upgrading from 1.1 On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Shelley, Ryan <victoria21@example.net> wro= te: > Would I have to re-configure everything after the upgrade? =A0Repositorie= s and Users, etc? No, that's stored elsewhere. There is a separate user database, don't delete that one. The configuration is in archiva.xml in newer versions. I'm not that familiar with 1.1 to be honest. The database has the info for the .../browse/... urls, which it can re-construct when it scans all the poms. Now that I think of it, you'll probably want to delete the indexes also (in the .index directory?) and let it rebuild those as well. -- Wendy From usersvictoria21@example.net Thu Sep 09 00:20:46 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 98844 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2010 00:20:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 9 Sep 2010 00:20:46 -0000 Received: (qmail 84049 invoked by uid 500); 9 Sep 2010 00:20:46 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 83856 invoked by uid 500); 9 Sep 2010 00:20:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.archiva.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 83846 invoked by uid 99); 9 Sep 2010 00:20:45 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 00:20:45 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-pw0-f42.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 00:20:22 +0000 Received: by pwj9 with SMTP id 9so405548pwj.15 for <victoria21@example.net>; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 17:20:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id x14mr376975wae.152.1283991600119; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 17:20:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [83.161.120.155] ([83.161.120.155]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c24sm1039069wam.19.283.161.120.155.19.56 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 08 Sep 2010 17:19:58 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Brett Porter <victoria21@example.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Subject: Re: Upgrading from 1.1 From: Brett Porter <victoria21@example.net> In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2010 10:19:53 +1000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> To: victoria21@example.net X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org If you're using the standalone bundle, I recommend following the steps = to separate the configuration so that upgrades in future don't require = copying the data around too. Cheers, Brett On 09/09/2010, at 4:00 AM, Shelley, Ryan wrote: > Just to follow-up, I have completed my upgrade from 1.1 to 1.3.1 = without problems. >=20 > I shut down Archiva, backed up my data directory, removed the = "archiva" database directory, removed the ".index" directories in the = repositories, untarred the new archiva release, copied only the = "archiva.xml" configuration over, moved the data directory over, then = restarted Archiva. After restart, I re-ran the Repository Scans and = Database Scan to rebuild the indexes and clean things up. Maven builds = seem to be running just fine against the new version. >=20 > Thanks for your input Wendy! >=20 > -Ryan >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Wendy Smoak [mailto:victoria21@example.net]=20 > Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 6:04 PM > To: victoria21@example.net > Subject: Re: Upgrading from 1.1 >=20 > On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Shelley, Ryan = <victoria21@example.net> wrote: >> Would I have to re-configure everything after the upgrade? = Repositories and Users, etc? >=20 > No, that's stored elsewhere. There is a separate user database, don't > delete that one. The configuration is in archiva.xml in newer > versions. I'm not that familiar with 1.1 to be honest. >=20 > The database has the info for the .../browse/... urls, which it can > re-construct when it scans all the poms. >=20 > Now that I think of it, you'll probably want to delete the indexes > also (in the .index directory?) and let it rebuild those as well. >=20 > -- > Wendy -- Brett Porter victoria21@example.net http://brettporter.wordpress.com/ From usersvictoria21@example.net Thu Sep 09 00:23:04 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 1190 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2010 00:23:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 9 Sep 2010 00:23:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 87252 invoked by uid 500); 9 Sep 2010 00:23:03 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 87195 invoked by uid 500); 9 Sep 2010 00:23:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.archiva.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 87187 invoked by uid 99); 9 Sep 2010 00:23:02 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 00:23:02 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO msg2.disney.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 00:22:39 +0000 Received: from int1.disney.pvt (int1.disney.pvt [83.161.120.155]) by msg2.disney.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o890MHG0012589 for <victoria21@example.net>; Thu, 9 Sep 2010 00:22:17 GMT Received: from sm-cala-xht03.swna.wdpr.disney.com (SM-CALA-XHT03.swna.wdpr.disney.com [83.161.120.155]) by int1.disney.pvt (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o890MHWV025605 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <victoria21@example.net>; Thu, 9 Sep 2010 00:22:17 GMT Received: from sm-cala-vxmb06a.swna.wdpr.disney.com ([888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a48920:73be:eaf5:e3af]) by sm-cala-xht03.swna.wdpr.disney.com ([888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a49907:f812]) with mapi; Wed, 8 Sep 2010 17:22:17 -0700 From: "Shelley, Ryan" <victoria21@example.net> To: "'victoria21@example.net'" <victoria21@example.net> Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 17:22:15 -0700 Subject: RE: Upgrading from 1.1 Thread-Topic: Upgrading from 1.1 Thread-Index: ActPtNxzB2lhcHw4QMisIlj0iRpifwAABdxA Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Source-IP: SM-CALA-XHT03.swna.wdpr.disney.com [83.161.120.155] X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Is there documentation on doing this? I didn't see much in the way of upgr= ading aside from 1.0 to 1.1 and 1.1 to 1.2. -----Original Message----- From: Brett Porter [mailto:victoria21@example.net] On Behalf Of Brett Porter Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 5:20 PM To: victoria21@example.net Subject: Re: Upgrading from 1.1 If you're using the standalone bundle, I recommend following the steps to s= eparate the configuration so that upgrades in future don't require copying = the data around too. Cheers, Brett On 09/09/2010, at 4:00 AM, Shelley, Ryan wrote: > Just to follow-up, I have completed my upgrade from 1.1 to 1.3.1 without = problems. >=20 > I shut down Archiva, backed up my data directory, removed the "archiva" d= atabase directory, removed the ".index" directories in the repositories, un= tarred the new archiva release, copied only the "archiva.xml" configuration= over, moved the data directory over, then restarted Archiva. After restar= t, I re-ran the Repository Scans and Database Scan to rebuild the indexes a= nd clean things up. Maven builds seem to be running just fine against the = new version. >=20 > Thanks for your input Wendy! >=20 > -Ryan >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Wendy Smoak [mailto:victoria21@example.net]=20 > Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 6:04 PM > To: victoria21@example.net > Subject: Re: Upgrading from 1.1 >=20 > On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Shelley, Ryan <victoria21@example.net> w= rote: >> Would I have to re-configure everything after the upgrade? Repositories= and Users, etc? >=20 > No, that's stored elsewhere. There is a separate user database, don't > delete that one. The configuration is in archiva.xml in newer > versions. I'm not that familiar with 1.1 to be honest. >=20 > The database has the info for the .../browse/... urls, which it can > re-construct when it scans all the poms. >=20 > Now that I think of it, you'll probably want to delete the indexes > also (in the .index directory?) and let it rebuild those as well. >=20 > -- > Wendy -- Brett Porter victoria21@example.net http://brettporter.wordpress.com/ From usersvictoria21@example.net Thu Sep 09 00:31:24 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 9639 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2010 00:31:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 9 Sep 2010 00:31:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 93499 invoked by uid 500); 9 Sep 2010 00:31:23 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 93423 invoked by uid 500); 9 Sep 2010 00:31:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.archiva.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 93415 invoked by uid 99); 9 Sep 2010 00:31:23 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 00:31:23 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-fx0-f42.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 00:31:01 +0000 Received: by fxm14 with SMTP id 14so624532fxm.15 for <victoria21@example.net>; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 17:30:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=SiwePvckooZJythjzEY499IIhpIAdoFzIPEghTN9L88=; b=HCbutFhsyaQnnbrxyMIpnL6BuweWEMtvQXjNf8LxRGNiecAIDq4c01zkSgqsQFusyY flWw2op5c1ra1iwJaLBTibjYC6+z8nN7MdwZnzB8SHmD2Np3nvqKIhSUVaQQyU+d8KdC KhPZLrzLYFG9Jl+CgUh07fnvj1QalS7slSebo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=ZG+8e9YZ7P+AtDn3gfQ6JMDig9KpimIHSRcLT85dv0Gx7kKfl6w3SyjCOWjN/rBM9v RAlOt8VHIU0Ifr61hfH33i+gsDEwo93gOlLBe1+fZzSKtA9tegTCaemCtFx7/jzzyXjG a+JINmVNmB3uuLaehxXrk8SoyhmmW+d/jynO0= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id t12mr522952hbb.7.1283992241101; Wed, 08 Sep 2010 17:30:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Wed, 8 Sep 2010 17:30:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> From: Wendy Smoak <victoria21@example.net> Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 20:30:21 -0400 Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> Subject: Re: Upgrading from 1.1 To: victoria21@example.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 8:22 PM, Shelley, Ryan <victoria21@example.net> wro= te: > Is there documentation on doing this? =A0I didn't see much in the way of = upgrading aside from 1.0 to 1.1 and 1.1 to 1.2. http://archiva.apache.org/docs/1.3.1/adminguide/standalone.html --=20 Wendy From usersvictoria21@example.net Thu Sep 09 00:35:23 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 10352 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2010 00:35:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 9 Sep 2010 00:35:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 94425 invoked by uid 500); 9 Sep 2010 00:35:22 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 94370 invoked by uid 500); 9 Sep 2010 00:35:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.archiva.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 94362 invoked by uid 99); 9 Sep 2010 00:35:22 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 00:35:22 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO msg3.disney.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Sep 2010 00:35:13 +0000 Received: from int1.disney.pvt (int1.disney.pvt [83.161.120.155]) by msg3.disney.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o890YriO021990 for <victoria21@example.net>; Thu, 9 Sep 2010 00:34:53 GMT Received: from sm-cala-xht03.swna.wdpr.disney.com (SM-CALA-XHT03.swna.wdpr.disney.com [83.161.120.155]) by int1.disney.pvt (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id o890YqwK011463 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <victoria21@example.net>; Thu, 9 Sep 2010 00:34:53 GMT Received: from sm-cala-vxmb06a.swna.wdpr.disney.com ([888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a48920:73be:eaf5:e3af]) by sm-cala-xht03.swna.wdpr.disney.com ([888a:dbb7:2d49:b3f6:8605:bf4e:caed:e5a49907:f812]) with mapi; Wed, 8 Sep 2010 17:34:52 -0700 From: "Shelley, Ryan" <victoria21@example.net> To: "'victoria21@example.net'" <victoria21@example.net> Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 17:34:51 -0700 Subject: RE: Upgrading from 1.1 Thread-Topic: Upgrading from 1.1 Thread-Index: ActPtlWa8f6W6VrQQomOxU5pK2Y7lgAAHEcw Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Source-IP: SM-CALA-XHT03.swna.wdpr.disney.com [83.161.120.155] Thanks Wendy and Brett! -----Original Message----- From: Wendy Smoak [mailto:victoria21@example.net]=20 Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 5:30 PM To: victoria21@example.net Subject: Re: Upgrading from 1.1 On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 8:22 PM, Shelley, Ryan <victoria21@example.net> wro= te: > Is there documentation on doing this? =A0I didn't see much in the way of = upgrading aside from 1.0 to 1.1 and 1.1 to 1.2. http://archiva.apache.org/docs/1.3.1/adminguide/standalone.html --=20 Wendy From usersvictoria21@example.net Wed Sep 15 08:24:07 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 98410 invoked from network); 15 Sep 2010 08:24:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 15 Sep 2010 08:24:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 1158 invoked by uid 500); 15 Sep 2010 08:24:07 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 882 invoked by uid 500); 15 Sep 2010 08:24:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.archiva.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 864 invoked by uid 99); 15 Sep 2010 08:24:03 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 08:24:03 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-qw0-f42.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 08:23:56 +0000 Received: by qwb8 with SMTP id 8so1477003qwb.15 for <victoria21@example.net>; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 01:23:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=QVFUlND78NYkQM0Lyr+dx+MEQ1VGRsnaZgkTrFfbY5U=; b=pWT9CeyMzC5a6ftss7VU6IGmujQp2C+XwO+GbK2zJbEguCc88kDl8uSW6Z2Fze4Ysu YLxXAo66pulQhlBYMtWbVU6BuBJ4et/bGUpYZhpepppgR6bwVw5g0f0jDFmqlnAhfLrg o86D4swBoooLaXRDagR03z2wzwTP2KfjcW2gM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=cqNf960W7VUR/BbjNeBdXOUotUvdPOdK1reXXNnJ1EyDParLN+Az+zI6gxHztZ5EYm nhQX96dyFEV9wPEXQ0beDmLQXLgK71T4WjuDhQ+F39F4FNCwUSZOgX9628eg5b7SBiQ3 OwotSkRUt2dQXajm2Uj6DAcjUdSkeeWeGVVi0= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id js14mr843409qcb.103.1284539016068; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 01:23:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 01:23:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 10:23:36 +0200 Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> Subject: mixing local repo and managed repo From: Em DauPhu <victoria21@example.net> To: victoria21@example.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi, I came across a continuous integration server hosting both an Hudson and an Archiva (as a proxy to our central). The settings.xml used in maven builds declare as the local repo the managed repository of the archiva. Is that wrong to use as a local repository (declared in the maven settings.xml) the actual managed repository of the archiva proxy? Can it leads to any trouble ? Thank you, Em. From usersvictoria21@example.net Wed Sep 15 10:31:07 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 35376 invoked from network); 15 Sep 2010 10:31:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 15 Sep 2010 10:31:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 55958 invoked by uid 500); 15 Sep 2010 10:31:06 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 55724 invoked by uid 500); 15 Sep 2010 10:31:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.archiva.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 55716 invoked by uid 99); 15 Sep 2010 10:31:03 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 10:31:03 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-qw0-f42.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 10:30:58 +0000 Received: by qwb8 with SMTP id 8so35118qwb.15 for <victoria21@example.net>; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 03:30:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=G2JGuuVv0kWbArPPQ9BCJisUJdhWLEc9VSEuzRFAOy4=; b=NOzTE7pgvZnz1Vz34fNwGEMjVj8IiE3ZdUOgwML0nQ0vugXFQz8F/OK6PzHDJoHPb8 mn6zbh+GqVFu6ApJRXm1gEs1BBBiV7n1eFDbnbKC9Ps0bkkhKQO1S2p0Y+o9fi0n1ui0 3JwAYioTJ6J3NAkDjldePYIGlot4TITUU+/js= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=lr877eNtTT28X4R99GTuywhj7u4EgFmVCKUrj6NYSm4laon20c2c52ty7HmYU9W4zt nlIteleSYLno8KX74h05BZvgibHgjh8Y5K8r35RP9gnE5i7jjIE0Odwet7zlPa01wR/0 ZJ/4CdmXbzPvhJNe6hSpNXtwGC/D+d636/W1g= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id r27mr742830qcr.294.1284546637214; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 03:30:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 03:30:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 12:30:37 +0200 Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> Subject: Re: mixing local repo and managed repo From: Em DauPhu <victoria21@example.net> To: victoria21@example.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I asked the same question on the maven mailing list and I got the following answer: "Yes, first local and remote maven repository doesn't contain the same metadata. And by the way, accessing a local repository by many instances isn't concurrent-safe (at least, in maven 2, I don't know precisely what's been done for maven 3, particularly along the parallel build evolution). So, both must be avoided. You also better want to isolate every hudson build from each other, having a local repository by job. And wiping those jobs regularly. http://www.sonatype.com/people/2009/01/maven-continuous-integration-best-practices/ <http://www.sonatype.com/people/2009/01/maven-continuous-integration-best-practices/>And a specific setting for hudson on my blog: http://batmat.net/blog/post/2009/10/09/[Hudson]-How-to-set-a-private-maven-repository-by-job-and-easily-be-able-to-delete-them Cheers" If somebody from here have a different opinion, I'm still interested. Thank you, Em. On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Em DauPhu <victoria21@example.net> wrote: > Hi, > > I came across a continuous integration server hosting both an Hudson > and an Archiva (as a proxy to our central). The settings.xml used in > maven builds declare as the local repo the managed repository of the > archiva. > Is that wrong to use as a local repository (declared in the maven > settings.xml) the actual managed repository of the archiva proxy? Can > it leads to any trouble ? > > Thank you, > Em. > From usersvictoria21@example.net Wed Sep 15 10:31:42 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 35593 invoked from network); 15 Sep 2010 10:31:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 15 Sep 2010 10:31:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 56396 invoked by uid 500); 15 Sep 2010 10:31:41 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 56352 invoked by uid 500); 15 Sep 2010 10:31:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.archiva.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 56344 invoked by uid 99); 15 Sep 2010 10:31:40 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 10:31:40 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-qw0-f42.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 10:31:35 +0000 Received: by mail-qw0-f42.google.com with SMTP id 8so35118qwb.15 for <victoria21@example.net>; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 03:31:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=G2JGuuVv0kWbArPPQ9BCJisUJdhWLEc9VSEuzRFAOy4=; b=NOzTE7pgvZnz1Vz34fNwGEMjVj8IiE3ZdUOgwML0nQ0vugXFQz8F/OK6PzHDJoHPb8 mn6zbh+GqVFu6ApJRXm1gEs1BBBiV7n1eFDbnbKC9Ps0bkkhKQO1S2p0Y+o9fi0n1ui0 3JwAYioTJ6J3NAkDjldePYIGlot4TITUU+/js= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=lr877eNtTT28X4R99GTuywhj7u4EgFmVCKUrj6NYSm4laon20c2c52ty7HmYU9W4zt nlIteleSYLno8KX74h05BZvgibHgjh8Y5K8r35RP9gnE5i7jjIE0Odwet7zlPa01wR/0 ZJ/4CdmXbzPvhJNe6hSpNXtwGC/D+d636/W1g= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id r27mr742830qcr.294.1284546637214; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 03:30:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 03:30:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 12:30:37 +0200 Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> Subject: Re: mixing local repo and managed repo From: Em DauPhu <victoria21@example.net> To: victoria21@example.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I asked the same question on the maven mailing list and I got the following answer: "Yes, first local and remote maven repository doesn't contain the same metadata. And by the way, accessing a local repository by many instances isn't concurrent-safe (at least, in maven 2, I don't know precisely what's been done for maven 3, particularly along the parallel build evolution). So, both must be avoided. You also better want to isolate every hudson build from each other, having a local repository by job. And wiping those jobs regularly. http://www.sonatype.com/people/2009/01/maven-continuous-integration-best-practices/ <http://www.sonatype.com/people/2009/01/maven-continuous-integration-best-practices/>And a specific setting for hudson on my blog: http://batmat.net/blog/post/2009/10/09/[Hudson]-How-to-set-a-private-maven-repository-by-job-and-easily-be-able-to-delete-them Cheers" If somebody from here have a different opinion, I'm still interested. Thank you, Em. On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Em DauPhu <victoria21@example.net> wrote: > Hi, > > I came across a continuous integration server hosting both an Hudson > and an Archiva (as a proxy to our central). The settings.xml used in > maven builds declare as the local repo the managed repository of the > archiva. > Is that wrong to use as a local repository (declared in the maven > settings.xml) the actual managed repository of the archiva proxy? Can > it leads to any trouble ? > > Thank you, > Em. > From usersvictoria21@example.net Wed Sep 15 11:19:59 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 48026 invoked from network); 15 Sep 2010 11:19:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 15 Sep 2010 11:19:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 98366 invoked by uid 500); 15 Sep 2010 11:19:59 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 98109 invoked by uid 500); 15 Sep 2010 11:19:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.archiva.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 98101 invoked by uid 99); 15 Sep 2010 11:19:54 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 11:19:54 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-pw0-f42.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 11:19:32 +0000 Received: by pwj9 with SMTP id 9so190807pwj.15 for <victoria21@example.net>; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 04:19:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id u4mr1560871wau.128.1284549550155; Wed, 15 Sep 2010 04:19:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [83.161.120.155] ([83.161.120.155]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d38sm2178100wam.8.283.161.120.155.19.07 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 15 Sep 2010 04:19:08 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Brett Porter <victoria21@example.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) Subject: Re: mixing local repo and managed repo From: Brett Porter <victoria21@example.net> In-Reply-To: <victoria21@example.net> Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 21:19:03 +1000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <victoria21@example.net> References: <victoria21@example.net> <victoria21@example.net> To: victoria21@example.net X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 15/09/2010, at 8:30 PM, Em DauPhu wrote: > I asked the same question on the maven mailing list and I got the > following answer: >=20 > "Yes, first local and remote maven repository doesn't contain the same > metadata. > And by the way, accessing a local repository by many instances isn't > concurrent-safe (at least, in maven 2, I don't know precisely what's = been > done for maven 3, particularly along the parallel build evolution). = So, both > must be avoided. >=20 > You also better want to isolate every hudson build from each other, = having a > local repository by job. And wiping those jobs regularly. > = http://www.sonatype.com/people/2009/01/maven-continuous-integration-best-p= ractices/ > = <http://www.sonatype.com/people/2009/01/maven-continuous-integration-best-= practices/>And > a specific setting for hudson on my blog: > = http://batmat.net/blog/post/2009/10/09/[Hudson]-How-to-set-a-private-maven= -repository-by-job-and-easily-be-able-to-delete-them >=20 > Cheers" >=20 > If somebody from here have a different opinion, I'm still interested. Nope, that's correct. Technically, it will mostly work. But you will fill the remote repo with = metadata it may not use. If you have differing repository IDs you could = corrupt the metadata. Maven may corrupt the metadata on its own as = mentioned. There's little benefit other than the disk space saved. Given how fast = Hudson would pull the artifacts from Archiva, you could regularly purge = the local repository and not have to worry too much about that. I wouldn't recommend it :) - Brett -- Brett Porter victoria21@example.net http://brettporter.wordpress.com/ From usersvictoria21@example.net Thu Sep 16 21:19:32 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 53690 invoked from network); 16 Sep 2010 21:19:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 16 Sep 2010 21:19:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 84266 invoked by uid 500); 16 Sep 2010 21:19:31 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 84210 invoked by uid 500); 16 Sep 2010 21:19:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Post: <mailto:victoria21@example.net> List-Id: <users.archiva.apache.org> Reply-To: victoria21@example.net Delivered-To: mailing list victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 84202 invoked by uid 99); 16 Sep 2010 21:19:30 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 21:19:30 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of victoria21@example.net designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO kuber.nabble.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 21:19:09 +0000 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([83.161.120.155]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <victoria21@example.net>) id 1OwLqy-0001Es-7H for victoria21@example.net; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 14:18:48 -0700 Message-ID: <victoria21@example.net> Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 14:18:48 -0700 (PDT) From: fnord <victoria21@example.net> To: victoria21@example.net Subject: Archiva refuses to serve some files MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Nabble-From: victoria21@example.net X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I'm running within Tomcat 6. The whole interface works fine, and some files that are in the repo reolve, while at other times, it just hangs. I get lots of things like this: [ivy:resolve] WARN: http://ivy:8080/archiva/repository/internal/jboss/hibernate3/4.3.0_CP06/hibernate3-4.3.0_CP06.jar The jar never gets delivered. If I hit the URL directly, it still doesn't get delivered. I can browse to the folder using the URL minus the jar name, and see that it's there, but clicking on it doesn't get me the file, the request just hangs until it times out. The file definitely physically exists on the filesystem, and is currently chmodded to 777 for testing. This has been happening to me off and on ever since I started using Archiva. Sometimes, resolution just bombs, because some files can't be delivered. If I re-run the build seconds later, it works perfectly. This happens both in Jetty and in Tomcat, and on 2 different servers. Has anyone else run into this? It's driving me nuts. -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Archiva-refuses-to-serve-some-files-tp29733106p29733106.html Sent from the archiva-users mailing list victoria21@example.net. From usersvictoria21@example.net Fri Sep 17 00:06:05 2010 Return-Path: <usersvictoria21@example.net> Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 4682 invoked from network); 17 Sep 2010 00:06:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 17 Sep 2010 00:06:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 75400 invoked by uid 500); 17 Sep 2010 00:06:04 -0000 Delivered-To: victoria21@example.net Received: (qmail 75334 invoked by uid 500); 17 Sep 2010 00:06:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact victoria21@example.net; run by ezmlm Precedence:
{'source': 'Apache Software Foundation Public Mail Archives'}