www-repository mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen McConnell <mcconn...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Where is version in UIR Syntax
Date Fri, 14 Nov 2003 00:27:34 GMT

Just based on opinions registered so far - it seems that the notion of 
version in the path has concensus and that the real question and 
difference between the two position holding attention is if a version in 
the filename should be manadatory or not. 

Is that a reasonable conclusions?

Stephen.


Nick Chalko wrote:

> Tim Anderson wrote:
>
>> I have a few comments on the content of that page:
>>
>> 1. Not sure why the discussion and the proposals are   separate, 
>> given the partial duplication of pros   and cons for each.
>>   Would prefer to see these merged.
>>
> Good point,  feel free to merge them.
> and add your pro cons. We will need this for later, when people ask us 
> Why, we can point them to the wiki summary.
>
>>
>> 2. Version be a mandatory component of artifact filename
>>  Pros:
>>  . Artifacts become identifiable when *downloaded* from the repository.
>>  . This is not compatible with the current ASF scheme.
>>    Neither maven, nor dist require version in the artifact filename.
>>
>>  Cons:
>>  . Presumes to know requirements of other repository users,
>>    for which we have no requirements.
>>
>> 3. Version in directory
>>  Cons:
>>  . I don't see how the need for a 'latest' symbolic link is a
>>    con. There is no uniform way at ASF at the moment to indicate
>>    the latest version.
>>  . Scheme not currently used by ASF.
>>
>> 4. There has been no discussion on how to cope with nightly or snapshot
>>   builds, which could change the version syntax. E.g:
>>   1. Subdir per build:
>>      http://repo.apache.org/apache/commons-cli/nightly/20031112/...
>>      http://repo.apache.org/apache/commons-cli/nightly/20031113/...
>>
>>   2. Embedded in version:
>>      http://repo.apache.org/apache/commons-cli/nightly-20031112/...
>>      http://repo.apache.org/apache/commons-cli/nightly-20031113/...
>>
>>   I'm leaning towards the former, as browsing is simpler.
>>   OTOH, this then leads to the possibility of "nightly",
>>   "snapshot", "release" etc being mandatory in product-specifier:
>>     product-specifier = organisation "/" project "/" rtype "/" version
>>   rtype = "nightly" | "snapshot" | "release" | ...
>>
>> -Tim
>>
>>  
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Nick Chalko [mailto:nick@chalko.com]
>>> Sent: Friday, 14 November 2003 9:51 AM
>>> To: repository@apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Where is version in UIR Syntax
>>>
>>>
>>> Current count.
>>> 2 For version dir with optional version on artifact name.
>>> 3 for version dir and versioned artifact name.
>>>
>>> Make sure you voice your opinion.
>>>
>>>
>>> Nick Chalko wrote:
>>>
>>>   
>>>
>>>> Lets see where we stand on the version.
>>>> Please go to
>>>>     
>>>
>>> http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ASFRepository/WhereIs
>>>   
>>
>> VersionInURISytnax  
>>
>>> and vote for the Proposal you prefer.
>>> Add pro's and con's as you see fit.
>>>
>>> Lets see how close we are to a consensus so wee can move on to other 
>>> parts of the URISyntax.
>>>
>>> R,
>>> Nick
>>>   
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>

-- 

Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:mcconnell@apache.org

|------------------------------------------------|
| Magic by Merlin                                |
| Production by Avalon                           |
|                                                |
| http://avalon.apache.org/merlin                |
| http://dpml.net/                               |
|------------------------------------------------|





Mime
View raw message