You are talking about this place, right?

https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/uima/

Is there a reason not to remove redundant parts? E.g. uimaj/2.3.1/?

Definitely sounds like a good idea. I'd keep uimaFIT as "uimafit" here.

For the addons, we might consider not having a separate folder for each
addon, and neither do source/binary releases for each release of an individual
addon. Instead, we might consider doing bundled milestone releases (like 
Eclipse)
every once in a while.

-- Richard

On 27.11.2013, at 13:37, Marshall Schor <[email protected]> wrote:

> This will help people who want an older release (from the archives) find it.
> 
> It seems the right folder structure, going forward might be a 2 level one:
> 
> <major project>
>   <version>
> 
> For example:
> 
> uimaj/uimaj-2.3.1/
> 
> uima-as/uima-as-2.3.1/
> 
> ruta/ruta-2.0.1
> 
> etc.
> 
> The top level elements would be limited, something like:
> uimaj
> uima-as
> addons  (this probably should have an additional layer: 
> addons/[add-on-name]/[versions])
> ruta
> uimaFIT
> ducc
> 
> and of course,
> 
> eclipse-update-site/[major-project-name]/[subsite for that project, following
> Eclipse conventions]
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> -Marshall

Reply via email to