Return-Path: 
 <repository-return-156-apmail-repository-archive=apache.org@apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-repository-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 31796 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2003 23:10:35 -0000
Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12)
  by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 30 Oct 2003 23:10:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 2081 invoked by uid 500); 30 Oct 2003 23:10:21 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-repository-archive@apache.org
Received: (qmail 2028 invoked by uid 500); 30 Oct 2003 23:10:21 -0000
Mailing-List: contact repository-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
list-help: <mailto:repository-help@apache.org>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:repository-unsubscribe@apache.org>
list-post: <mailto:repository@apache.org>
Reply-To: repository@apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list repository@apache.org
Received: (qmail 1989 invoked from network); 30 Oct 2003 23:10:20 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO adslgateway.multitask.com.au) (202.44.167.185)
  by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 30 Oct 2003 23:10:20 -0000
In-Reply-To: <024d01c39f32$c3429e10$49163b41@tsws1>
To: repository@apache.org
Subject: Re: URI Syntax was: Repository
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5 September 26, 2003
From: dion@multitask.com.au
Message-ID: 
 <OF4455AF06.D57A80F9-ONCA256DCF.007E4776-CA256DCF.007F4B62@multitask.com.au>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 10:16:08 +1100
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on ADSLGateway/Multitask
 Consulting/AU(Release 6.0|September
 26, 2002) at 31/10/2003 10:16:12 AM,
	Serialize complete at 31/10/2003 10:16:12 AM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N
X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

"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