www-repository mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Steve Loughran" <steve.lough...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Making Policy decisions on artifacts and how they look.
Date Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:15:12 GMT
On 12/12/06, Davanum Srinivas <davanum@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Infra folks,
>
> Looks like we have some folks in the repository@ mailing list who are
> making ASF wide policy decisions without consulting anyone. Not this
> list, not the members list, not the pmc's list, nor the board.
>

I dont see anyone making ASF-wide policy decisions.

I see people trying to stay in control of the Maven repository -a repo
for a single project- and struggling to stay in control against the
appearance of random artifacts which often come from apache projects
without adequate signoff from the PMCs and with pretty low quality
metadata. The fact that other projects (ivy, me) use the same repo is
because there is lots of stuff in there, rather than because its the
official 'apache' repo.

Nobody is telling you what to call the project; you can have anything
except slash, ASCII<32, space or < >. Carlos is merely trying to
impose a better hierarchy on how things are stored *in the
repository*. The M1 repo had a flat naming system which puts too much
load on the root directory. A hierarchy is better. If everything
WS-related was under org.apache.ws then you could browse to
org/apache/ws and see the entire suite of artifacts. If we go flat
under org.apache then it ends up having the scale problem.

There's more control of external artifacts where the files get pulled
in by hand; in that context things are locked down and less messy.
Maybe we should do that for apache stuff too, instead of being so
trusting.

Sorry,

-Steve

Mime
View raw message