I'm just thinking about this now. I much prefer the 'specify the
path' approach and was thinking of dumping the magic ID's and just
referencing by name in the webapp and using an internal identifier
instead. Much the same as I've been thinking of dumping <id> from
Maven itself.
I'll get back to you when I've finished thinking about it :)
- Brett
On 31/01/2007, at 10:09 AM, Joakim Erdfelt wrote:
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
