Mailing-List: contact archiva-dev-help@maven.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: archiva-dev@maven.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3)
In-Reply-To: <4729095D.9010000@erdfelt.com>
References: <471D67C2.80109@erdfelt.com>
 <DFCC03E3-3DA8-4248-BD45-30B75CBE3134@apache.org>
 <4729095D.9010000@erdfelt.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <70880114-CD73-4229-B3A4-C691A44177CB@apache.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Brett Porter <brett@apache.org>
Subject: Re: MRM-549 & MRM-547 : Proxy Connector Policy settings.
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 10:47:37 +1100
To: archiva-dev@maven.apache.org

On 01/11/2007, at 10:01 AM, Joakim Erdfelt wrote:

> IGNORED is a universal setting that means ... "This policy is  
> ignored."
> It can be applied to any policy.
>
> Changing IGNORED to ALWAYS is makes no sense for the other policies.

I wasn't suggesting this for anything but release and snapshots (it  
was an eg, not an ie). For cache: it's a yes/no answer, and for  
checksum ignore is valid.

> What about using SKIP in place of IGNORED?
> What about using REJECT in place of DISABLED?

I'm still confused what that really means.

In the first set, to me, SKIP means "don't ever check for updates",  
since the context is when to check for updates, right? But I think  
you're saying it means "skip the check about whether to check for  
updates and check for updates anyway".

If the question to be asked is "how often should Archiva check for  
updates"? SKIP, DISABLED, IGNORED, REJECT are not valid answers in  
the context of what happens. ALWAYS and NEVER would be.

Or am I asking the wrong question? If so, what is a question you can  
ask and have each option as an answer for that matches the current  
behaviour?

Likewise:

* Should I cache failures? YES or NO. Or it could be "What should I  
do when I encounter a failure?" CACHE or DON'T CACHE. But IGNORED/ 
SKIP/DISABLED/REJECT don't make sense in this context (at least with  
the given behaviour)

* What should I do when a checksum is invalid? IGNORE, FIX or FAIL.

Make sense?

>
> Brett Porter wrote:
>> I'd say 2)
>>
>> please just change "ignored" to a value that interacts with the  
>> artifact (eg, always) instead of the policy, since that's what all  
>> the other values do.
>>
>>
--
Brett Porter - brett@apache.org
Blog: http://www.devzuz.org/blogs/bporter/