On 25 June 2015 at 15:02, Benedikt Ritter <[email protected]> wrote: > One benefit of the proposed structure would be, that we would have > everything that belongs to a release in one place: release notes, sources, > binaries. Currently the dist location of lang looks like the following: > > RELEASE-NOTES.txt (of the 3.4 release) > - source > -- 2.6 sources > -- 3.4 sources > - binaries > -- 2.6 binaries > -- 3.4 binaries > > No release notes for 2.6 :-( > > Another thing I've never understood is, why it's called "source" (singular) > but "binaries" (plural).
I think it's because some projects release different binaries for different architectures. e.g. httpd. > I'm +1 to move to the new layout for any releases to come. > > Benedikt > > 2015-06-23 18:48 GMT+02:00 Phil Steitz <[email protected]>: > >> On 6/23/15 9:05 AM, sebb wrote: >> > On 22 June 2015 at 19:11, Benedikt Ritter <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> 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. >> > It won't affect Maven URLs. >> > >> >> Maybe we should change the layout for the releases to come and >> >> leave anything we already have there as it is? >> > Yes, it should only apply to new releases. >> >> That would get pretty ugly for [pool] and [dbcp] which maintain >> multiple "current" release distros. Could probably be hacked with >> symlinks or something but honestly I would rather spend time on >> other things... >> >> Phil >> > >> >> 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 >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > >> > >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
