Return-Path: 
 <repository-return-298-apmail-repository-archive=apache.org@apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-repository-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 52079 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2003 00:21:41 -0000
Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (208.185.179.12)
  by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 10 Nov 2003 00:21:41 -0000
Received: (qmail 38171 invoked by uid 500); 10 Nov 2003 00:21:26 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-repository-archive@apache.org
Received: (qmail 38133 invoked by uid 500); 10 Nov 2003 00:21:26 -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 38106 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2003 00:21:25 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO osm.net) (212.198.17.4)
  by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 10 Nov 2003 00:21:25 -0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1])
          by osm.net (JAMES SMTP Server 3.0a1) with SMTP ID 379
          for <repository@apache.org>;
          Mon, 10 Nov 2003 01:24:25 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <3FAEDAB9.7020405@apache.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 01:24:25 +0100
From: Stephen McConnell <mcconnell@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624
X-Accept-Language: en, en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: repository@apache.org
Subject: Re: Comments on URI Syntax
References: <AHEMLCHGJOKOCPPFEOIHKEKIHIAA.tma@netspace.net.au>
 <3FAED930.4000603@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <3FAED930.4000603@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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


Woops - see small correction in line.


Stephen McConnell wrote:

>
>
> Tim Anderson wrote:
>
>>> By implication - the README is not an artifact but a feature of a 
>>> version.
>>> Is that a reasonable conclusion?
>>> Stephen.
>>>   
>>
>>
>> Why make the distinction? I view everything a project deploys as an
>> artifact. Some artifacts will only be useful to end users (e.g, 
>> README, LICENSE.txt etc), others will be useful to tools.
>>
>
> Because there is difference between aggregation of files of a 
> partiular type as distinct from files that describe a particular typed 
> file instance.  I view the "artifact" as the principal file held in a 
> directory qualifed by a type (e.g. the jar file in a jars directory), 
> and that other resources such as READMEs, LICENSEs, MD5s, etc. are 
> examples of data that describe features of specific things such as a 
> group, version, artifact, etc.
>
> Why make the distinction?  When I look at the available artifacts in a 
> /jars/ directory I will present these as an list of artifacts.  A user 
> may select to view the properties/features of one of these items.  
> Using the name of an artifact - I can locate additional information 
> about the artifact such as the MD5 signature, maybe the license or 
> some dependency information - providing there is a convention that is 
> predictable.  I.e. I need a mechanism to locate information about a 
> particular artifact - e.g. 


I left out the all important principal artifact.

  <artifact-path>.<type>    <--------- the principal artifact (e.g. 
jars/fred.jar)
  <artifact-path>.<something>  <------ some metadata
  <artifact-path>.<something-else> <-- more meta data
  <artifact-path>.MD5 <--------------- artifact signature
  <artifact-path>.README <------------ readme about the artifact

The important thing is the recognition of the difference between a file 
that *is* the artifact as distinct from a file that *describes* an artifact.

Stephen.

>
>
>   <artifact-path>.<something>
>   <artifact-path>.<something-else>
>   <artifact-path>.MD5
>   <artifact-path>.README
>
> Etc.
>
> Stephen.

-- 

Stephen J. McConnell
mailto:mcconnell@apache.org