Costin Manolache wrote:
On Fri, 28 Feb 2003, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Seeing the interest it has raised, I tend to think think it's time to get the act together and start working on it. I'd like to propose this for incubation ASAP, so to not loose momentum.
...
Codebases or part of codebases that could convole in the effort:
...
I don't think the main issue is codebases. What we need is a minimal
common ground on naming conventions for the repository ( so projects
can get in sync with the repository ), and an agreement on a metadata
format ( descriptors for dependencies and versions and so on ).
I think discussion on codebase will just create a mess. The goal is to have a jar repository and get some consistency among our projects.
I agree.
If we have a layout and metadata we agree on - any tool could work.
If it is an ant task or a perl program or we just rsync - it doesn't matter.
A somewhat standard layout is the important part.
If we are changing current practice I think
project/[subproject]/version/(jar|zip|gz|docs|liscenses) is very good.
All kinds of artifacts for a particular version in one dir. Seems the easiest to me.
Costin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Nick Chalko Show me the code.
Centipede
Ant + autodownloadable build plugins + needed jars autodownload.
http://krysalis.org/centipede
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
