www-repository mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Tim Anderson" <...@netspace.net.au>
Subject RE: [VOTE] Where is version in URI Syntax
Date Fri, 14 Nov 2003 00:43:02 GMT
I've restructured the wiki page at
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ASFRepository/WhereIsVersionInU
RISytnax,
and removed the part about symbolic links.

-Tim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nick Chalko [mailto:nick@chalko.com]
> Sent: Friday, 14 November 2003 11:00 AM
> To: repository@apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Where is version in UIR Syntax
>
>
> 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
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>



Mime
View raw message