www-repository mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen McConnell <mcconn...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [proposal] java artifact specifier v0.1
Date Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:26:46 GMT


Michal Maczka wrote:

> IMHO "type" directory  should be mandatory


+1

>
>
> We should always use:
> http://repo.apache.org/apache/ant/1.5.4/keys/KEYS-1.5.4
>
> More rules and exceptions will make entire process harder from point 
> of view of tools.
>
> My proposition is:
>
>  repository-uri = access-specifier "/" product-specifier "/"
>                   artifact-specifier
>
> For java artifacts, artifact-specifier is:
>
>  artifact-specifier = {plural form of type} "/" artifact
>  
>  type = "jar" | "war" | "rar" | "tld" | "binary" | "source"
>         | "license" | ...
>
>  {plural form of type} = "jars" | "wars" | "rars" | "tlds" | 
> "binaries" | "source"
>         | "licenses" | ... 



I'm not keen on the notion of a static type enumeration and 
corresponding plural form.  This sort of information can be easily 
expressed in a meta descriptor at the level of a group - .e.g. 
".group".  A .group file could include the mapping of a type to its 
plural form within the scope of the group which would significantly 
improve the machine friendliness of the repository model. You can apply 
the same principal to distinguish and qualify other level in the 
repository - e.g. .type qualifying a directory as a type directory.

Stephen.

-- 

Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:mcconnell@apache.org




Mime
View raw message