Mailing-List: contact user-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Users List" <user@commons.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of phidias51@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.210.43 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 07:44:40 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CAOwy01uAxoiaS+c7FNK8cuz2f837EZTPuNkDhQsu9_wnDPXMNg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: [vfs] Plugins Question
From: Mark Fortner <phidias51@gmail.com>
To: Commons Users List <user@commons.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8ff245df468daf04c37541ce

--e89a8ff245df468daf04c37541ce
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

One of the great benefits that VFS has is the plugins that provide support
for a variety of file systems. The challenge though is that due primarily
to licensing conflicts, the VFS project doesn't actually host all of the
file system implementations that are available.  And although we have a
wiki page that lists a couple of the implementations, there are no doubt a
lot of unregistered implementations.

When I do a search of mvnrepository, the results are incomplete, meaning
that not all of the implementations are registered in mvnrepository, and
the ones that are, aren't necessarily compatible with whatever version of
VFS I'm running.

So my questions are these:

   1. Is there a better way of finding all VFS implementations compatible
   with version X of VFS?
   2. Is there a way of determining what version of VFS has the most
   implementations?
   3. Is there some way in Maven or Gradle to simply include all
   implementations compatible with version X without having to individually
   register each one?
   4. Are there any guidelines to point implementation developers in the
   right direction, in terms of properly registering their implementations so
   that other people can find them and use them?
   5. Are there any plans to make all of this easier?


Cheers,

Mark

--e89a8ff245df468daf04c37541ce--