I'm the one responsible for the misguided repository.urlName concept. It's biting me in the butt now, but I still feel strongly enough to keep it as a concept.
My justification. 1) Makes the repository snippet make sense. 2) Makes URLs nice and clean. 3) Allows future work to auto-adjust pom-internal <repositories> when proxying to point to archiva repo instead. The repository snippet has proven to be very popular, and tying a long form id found in a <repository> element in your pom to the url prefix seemed wrong. Using ID : http://localhost/repository/corporate.snapshots/ Using Url Name: http://localhost/repository/snapshots/ How do the other developers feel about this decision? Should we dump repository.urlName in favor of id across the board? - Joakim
