Sounds good to me. Would be more "maven-style". However I'm not sure how this change would affect clients referencing the absolute URLs of the artifacts. Maybe we should change the layout for the releases to come and leave anything we already have there as it is?
Benedikt 2015-06-22 7:18 GMT+02:00 Gary Gregory <[email protected]>: > I'm OK with a different layout. > Gary > > -------- Original message -------- > From: sebb <[email protected]> > Date: 06/21/2015 17:09 (GMT-08:00) > To: [email protected] > Subject: [ALL] re-organise dist directory layout? > > I wonder whether the current directory layout is the most convenient. > > At present, binaries and source are held in separate areas, and all > versions of each type are combined. > > I think it might simplify matters to use a single directory per > version, with both source and binary together. > > The current arrangement makes it a bit awkward when uploading the > files, as the different files have to be moved into the appropriate > folders. It also makes it awkward to delete obsolete versions, and > harder to rename files from the dist/dev to the dist/release area. > It's also a bit more awkard when checking releases, as two directorie > have to be downloaded. > > Changing the mirror layout would not affect people using the download > pages. > It would look a bit different for users who browse the mirror folders, > but this will be a small minority of users, and it's pretty easy to > distinguish the source archives from the binary ones. > > Thoughts? > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > -- http://people.apache.org/~britter/ http://www.systemoutprintln.de/ http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter http://github.com/britter
