What is your attitude towards putting the Java version into Maven Central? about osm-binary

[simon04]

[OSM-dev] Java library OSM-binary is on Maven Central

Hi OSM developers,

openstreetmap/OSM-binary [1] is the library for reading/writing OSM
pbf files. Since today, its Java version is available from Maven
Central [2, 3]. Big thanks to everyone involved [4]!

Cheers,
Simon

[1] https://github.com/openstreetmap/OSM-binary
[2] https://github.com/openstreetmap/OSM-binary#java-version
[3] https://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2/org/openstreetmap/pbf/osmpbf/
[4] #19

[simon04]

I've opened a community support ticket for the inclusion in Maven Central, https://issues.sonatype.org/browse/OSSRH-61093

It seems that we cannot use the groupId crosby.binary (from pom.xml) as it does not reflect a domain we own. Maven Central seems to be rather strict (Choosing your Coordinates). Should be change the groupId to something like org.openstreetmap.binary?

cc: @joto, @don-vip

[joto]

I am not even sure who would have the authority in the OSM project to allow us the use of the domain. Is there some precedent in other OSM Java projects? How does Osmosis handle this?

Would a switch from crosby.binary to org.openstreetmap.binary lead to incompatibilities somewhere? There are a lot of people out there using our library.

[simon04]

It does affect how the dependency is specified in the build system. The library itself (the Java packages used in the jar file) wouldn't be affected.

Osmosis uses org.openstreetmap.osmosis, see https://search.maven.org/search?q=g:org.openstreetmap.osmosis
Atlas uses org.openstreetmap.atlas, see https://search.maven.org/search?q=g:org.openstreetmap.atlas

[joto]

This sounds like it would be a good move to change the naming here. I don't really like the binary in org.openstreetmap.binary because it is rather generic a term, but we already have that in the repository naming also, so maybe it is better to keep that.

Technically speaking what is needed for this switch?

@pnorman You are EWG and OSMF board. Any suggestions/insights?

[simon04]

I don't really like the binary in org.openstreetmap.binary because it is rather generic a term

An alternative would be org.openstreetmap.pbf …

Technically speaking what is needed for this switch?

An update of those two lines,

OSM-binary/pom.xml

Lines 6 to 7 in ab88d68

	<groupId>crosby.binary</groupId>
	<artifactId>osmpbf</artifactId>

If we decide to change the Java package as well (incompatible change), various lines like

OSM-binary/src.java/crosby/binary/BinaryParser.java

Line 18 in ab88d68

package crosby.binary;

would need to be updated.

[joto]

@simon04 Do we need some kind of approval from the owner of openstreetmap.org?

[simon04]

From https://issues.sonatype.org/browse/OSSRH-61093:

Do you own the domain binary.crosby? If so, please verify ownership via one of the following methods:

• Add a TXT record to your DNS referencing this JIRA ticket: OSSRH-61093 (Fastest)
• Setup a redirect to your Github page (if it does not already exist)

[pnorman]

@pnorman You are EWG and OSMF board. Any suggestions/insights?

Not really - I haven't given something like this any thought in the past.

[simon04]

@joto, how to proceed? Should we go for…?

 <groupId>org.openstreetmap.pbf</groupId> 
 <artifactId>osmpbf</artifactId> 

The decision is somewhat arbitrary and shouldn't block the Maven Central efforts endlessly. :-)

[joto]

@simon04 I am fine with that, but as you need access to the DNS you need outside support for that. Maybe open a ticket on https://github.com/openstreetmap/operations ?

[simon04]

https://issues.sonatype.org/browse/OSSRH-61093?focusedCommentId=976926&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-976926

We're planning to go for the group id org.openstreetmap.pbf

Since OpenStreetMap is a community project, the proof of owning the domain openstreetmap.org might involve a few other people and might be not as easy for companies.

In #19, a few OpenStreetMap core developers expressed their support for getting this project published to Maven Central.

Please let us know how to proceed. Thank you!

[simon04]

https://issues.sonatype.org/browse/OSSRH-61093?focusedCommentId=976935&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-976935

Please have someone who already has deployer access on an org.openstreetmap groupId comment here to validate your request.

---

@brettch, can you help out at OSSRH-61093 to validate this request (getting OSM-binary published as org.openstreetmap.pbf)? Thank you!

[brettch]

I've commented on OSSRH-61093. Let me know if you need anything else.

To avoid confusion, I'd suggest updating the package name to org.openstreetmap.org in the project as well as just the group id.

FYI.  Osmosis already packages its own forked version of this library as well (just a package name change to avoid conflicts). If this new version is published then Osmosis could probably be updated to use it and avoid managing its own fork.