On 17/03/2008, at 9:49 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote:
Not that it's entirely relevant, but making the assumption this is archiva motivated is not completely out of the blue. The unit test mentions archiva, the jira mentions archiva, the only site docs I noticed being updated showed how this was used with archiva, the developer that wrote committed and resolved has only 3 commits on core and all the rest are on archiva. So I think it might be a valid assumption...
Well, except there was no evidence in the change itself (it would work equally with artifactory using repository names that aligned to maven ids). It's not surprising that an Archiva user is going to give Archiva examples and test cases.
Frankly, I think you should have given Nicolas the benefit of the doubt before charging forth to rollback his commit, and just asked the question here like I did in February when I had a suggestion about the original implementation. He did the right thing with his other fix to core, as well as multiple ones to the plugins.
- Brett -- Brett Porter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
