www-repository mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nick Chalko <n...@chalko.com>
Subject version dir vs version suffix was Re: [proposal] daedalus jar repository
Date Mon, 03 Mar 2003 06:23:30 GMT
dion@multitask.com.au wrote:

 >Nick Chalko <nick@chalko.com> wrote on 01/03/2003 05:09:50 AM:
 >
 >
 >
 >>A somewhat standard layout is the important part.
 >>
 >>If we are changing current practice  I think
 >>
 >>project/[subproject]/version/(jar|zip|gz|docs|liscenses)
 >>is very good.
 >>
 >>
 >
 >Sub project is, IMHO, way too fragile to be part of the URI. This is why
 >we left it out of maven. Same for cvs name.
 >
 >Projects often move 'up' and change their cvs repo.
 >
 >
Concur only project  not project/subproject.

But what do we recommend as the project name that will avoid name
collisions in Apache.

For java the package will work
org.apache.ant

It the package havnges the builds will break anways.

 >
 >
 >>All kinds of artifacts for a particular version in one dir.  Seems the
 >>easiest to me.
 >>
 >>
 >My personal preference is to have the version in the artifact name for 
use
 >later on.
 >
 >This is, I know, an unpopular view, but one that has saved many people
 >time in the long run.
 >
I agree that having the version in the artifact name is very usefull.

But I still like having all the artifacts for one version in one place.

Is  /project/version/artifact-version.ext    overkill?




 >--
 >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