www-repository mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen McConnell <mcconn...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Scope/Phasing
Date Sat, 08 Nov 2003 03:10:27 GMT


Jason van Zyl wrote:

>
>Component deployment and an applications use of a repository are irrelavent;
>
An applications use of a repository represent real and tangible examples 
of expected utility - i.e. actual functional requirements.

Sure "get me a versioned artefact of a particular type" is a privative 
operation and around this we can establish specific requirements. But 
should this be considered in isolation of a higher-level requirement to 
"get me the latest artefact of a particular type"? We can look up and 
see common requirements including "get me the set of relationships for 
this artefact" and so on and so on as you move across different 
abstractions. However, when look at requirements from the actual usage 
point of view we quickly notice idiosyncrasies – for example - the 
difference between physical types (e.g. a jar file) and logical types 
(e.g. a plugin that actually maps to physical type). The point is that 
the real requirements are coming from the repository enabled 
applications – and drilling down from this perspective will actually 
ensure that the end result meets actual needs.

Stephen.


-- 

Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:mcconnell@apache.org




Mime
View raw message