Shawn Walker wrote: > > __cert/ > > So, the open question here is whether all certs will be 'ssl' certs? > If they are, this should be 'ssl'.
"cert" seems fine to me. > As such, are there any objections to the layout below, or should I > retain the original proposed scheme? I'd go for the new proposal myself. > ============================== > Proposed Server Storage Scheme > ============================== > <REPO_ROOT>/ > catalog/ > index/ > publisher/ > <publisher>/ > file/ > pkg/ > <stem>/ > <manifest-named-after-uri-encoded-version> > trans/ > > ============================== > Proposed Client Storage Scheme > ============================== > <IMG_ROOT>/ > cert/ Is there a utility in defining "cert" for the server, too? How would it compare to "cert" on the client, and how would it relate to running a server out of a client's directory? This question is probably mostly puntable for now, but if you've given it any thought yet ... > history/ > index/ > pm_cache/ > state/ > publisher/ > <publisher>/ > file/ (formerly download) > pkg/ > <stem>/ > <manifest-named-after-uri-encoded-version> > trans/ "trans" on the client? > pkg_cache/ > <stem>/ > <uri-encoded-version>.<cache_name> (manifest cache file) Danek _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
