www-repository mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From d...@multitask.com.au
Subject Re: URI Syntax was: Repository
Date Thu, 30 Oct 2003 23:16:08 GMT
"Adam R. B. Jack" <ajack@trysybase.com> wrote on 31/10/2003 09:10:44 AM:

> Folks wrote:
> Are we discussing URI or URL? If URI, ok good .. but is this current?
> 
> I thought it was more like (w/ pseudo-regexp notation):
> 
>     http://<host>/<group>/jars/<id>[-<version>][-<type>].ext

'jars' is the <type> of the thing. e.g. jars, tlds, wars, ears, exes, bins 
etc.

> I'm not sure I like all of that (and yes, it is Java centric) but as I
> understand it, it is how the repositories currently look.

>From my angle they're not java centric, it's just that most of the content 
is java executable code. But, for example, ibiblio has a licenses 
directory where jars would be, and distributions, poms etc.

> 1) I could cope w/o 'jars' if that made it less Java centric.
AFAIC, it's the type of the artifact.

> 2) I don't like the redundant /<version>/ -- it leads to the needs for
> symlinks for latest (or similar). I prefer it in the filename. Once 
things
> get copied out of a repository it is good to see what they are, fully
> qualified.
Ditto.

[snip]
--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
Blog:      http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/dion/
Pub Key:http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/dion/public-key.asc




Mime
View raw message