forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <nicola...@apache.org>
Subject Re: repositories
Date Sun, 28 Dec 2003 14:50:49 GMT

Replying a bit late...

David Crossley wrote:

> Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
> 
>>Dave Brondsema wrote:
>>...
>>
>>>In
>>>http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/ReadMsg?listName=forrest-dev@xml.apache.org&msgNo=8929
>>>you suggested a property called 'forrest.extensions.descriptors'.  Do we want
>>>these descriptors to apply to more than just skins?  In light of the recent
>>>discussion of skins, I am inclined to keep skins descriptors seperate from dtd
>>>descriptors and any other descriptors we might have.
>>
>>Are we talking about the same thing here? As "descriptor" I mean the XML 
>>file that tells Forrest where to download extensions.
>>
> 
> <snip/>
> 
>>I was thinking of changing it to:
>>
>><forrest-extensions>
>>   <extension type="skin"
>>              name="testskin"
>>              author="Nicola Ken Barozzi"
>>              website="http://www.nicolaken.com"
>>         url="http://www.apache.org/~nicolaken/whiteboard/forrestskins/">
>>     <description>
>>       Based on the standard forrest-site skin.
>>       (Note: This is only a test skin, with trivial changes to
>>        demonstrate the concept.)
>>     </description>
>>   </extension >
>>   <extension type="dtd"
>>              name="testdtd"
>>              author="Nicola Ken Barozzi"
>>              website="http://www.nicolaken.com"
>>         url="http://www.apache.org/~nicolaken/whiteboard/forrestdtds/">
>>     <description>
>>       Blah
>>     </description>
>>   </extension >
>>
>>...etc
>>
>>Why should we have two different files?
> 
> I think that DTD descriptors would need more information.
> There is no guarantee that all the bit-and-pieces are packed
> together in one nice compressed archive. This is especially
> the case for DTDs that we do not manage and cannot re-distribute.

Hmmm. If we cannot distribute them, then we should not even link to 
them, as autodownload is basically equivalent to redistribution in most 
cases. We should not mix things: or we distribute, or we link to their 
whole package if they ask us for it.

> I can see DTDs that have the main DTD at one URL and DTD modules
> at another relative URL. Maybe they do not provide a catalog,
> so it would need to come from a third-party site.

I'd say that we stick to redistributable ones for now. 
Non-redistributable ones will still need to be installed by hand.

> Perhaps we need to define the individual pieces separately in the
> descriptor with a "from" and "to" and "type" etc. so that the
> descriptor can tell Ant where to get and put the individual pieces.

This is redistribution, I'd rather stay away from half-distros.

In any case this system is thought for custom DTD extensions, so the 
system will anyway get the whole package from a place that distributes 
them and that agrees that we link to them.

-- 
Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nicolaken@apache.org
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------


Mime
View raw message