On Mar 10, 2006, at 11:28 PM, Adam Kennedy wrote:
Ken Williams wrote:
On Mar 9, 2006, at 8:16 AM, Graham Barr wrote:
On Thu, March 9, 2006 3:25 am, Randy W. Sims wrote:
The repository field could be constructed as a mapping:
repository:
type: cvs
location:
:pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cvsroot/module-build
or possibly some type of (icky) compound field:
repository: [svn] https://svn.versiondude.net/randys/CPAN-
Metadata
I think it would be good to keep the field as a URL. Why does it
have to
actually give the direct access point. Why could it not be a link
to a
page that gives details about the repository.
Yeah, that's what I'm thinking too. For a mailing list, for
example, you don't want to give a mailto: URL or something, you
want to point to an info page. Probably the same thing is true
with repositories.
But in the case of Ilya for example, there IS no webpage, and his
email address IS the only support channel.
Well mailto: is a URL, so Ilya could put his email in there. But I
don't think that should be what we encourage people todo. We should
should encourage people to use these fields with the most useful
value for the end user. IMHO that would normally be a link to a web
page, but Ilya would have his own email address in there.
Graham.
