www-community mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Noel J. Bergman" <n...@devtech.com>
Subject RE: ASF Repository Structure
Date Sat, 01 Mar 2003 03:25:25 GMT
Dion,

Is there a reason why a project's repository URI cannot be orthogonal to
whatever file system naming convention is adopted for downloadable parts?  I
think that it has to be orthogonal if we are to federate with other
repositories without having to incorporate them by value.  And it supports
evolution.

Or at least that is how it seems to me.

	--- Noel

-----Original Message-----
From: dion@multitask.com.au [mailto:dion@multitask.com.au]
Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 20:37
To: community@apache.org
Subject: Re: [proposal] daedalus jar repository


As an aside, one of the issues we had when coming up with Maven's repository
format, is that often artifacts (jars, wars, ears etc), will get left on the
filesystem outside of a repository.

Think rpms for example.

Having a file encode <project>-<artifact>-<version>.type has been very
useful for us.

Yes, it's often different from what the project creates and distributes, but
I (and others) have been bitten by commons-logging.jar, struts.jar,
junit.jar so many times, that seeing log4j-1.2.5.jar is a godsend.

--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
Blog:      http://www.freeroller.net/page/dion/Weblog
Work:      http://www.multitask.com.au


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message