Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

checksums published in Maven are incorrect #22

Open
GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Nov 6, 2015 · 1 comment
Open

checksums published in Maven are incorrect #22

GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Nov 6, 2015 · 1 comment

Comments

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link

The checksums (md5 and sha1) being published in the yoolab maven repository
are incorrect. This seems to be the case for many, if not all, artifacts.
For example, a maven build using as3commons-reflect-1.3 as a dependency
fails when checksum validation is turned on.

If I download the as3commons-reflect-1.3.pom from the yooolab maven
repository and the same pom from the subversion version control repository,
they are identical when I do a diff on them. I also get the same MD5 and
SAH1 checksums for them. But those checksums do not match those published
in the as3commons-reflect-1.3.pom.sha1 and as3commons-reflect-1.3.pom.md5
files in the yoolab repo.

Maven 2.2.0 had a bug in it that it published (i.e. deployed) bad checksums
(see http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-4235) Is it possible as3-commons
is using v 2.2.0? 

Original issue reported on code.google.com by mved...@gmail.com on 23 Apr 2010 at 7:30

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

I am unaware of the maven version it was used to deploy the artifacts on the
repository, neverthless by managing this issue I discovered that apparently 
version
2.2.1 (which I am currently using and that is at this time the latest stable) is
still affected by a similar bug: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-4301.

Following the workarounds reported on the ticket I could redeploy without 
problems
all latest releases (including as3commons-reflect-1.3). I leave the ticket open 
so
that I will remember to review the issue for a possibly more stable solution.

Original comment by martino....@gmail.com on 20 May 2010 at 4:12

  • Changed state: Accepted

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant