Dion: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > First, Dion, what would you like to see? What are your goals for this > > I was hoping to revive some discussion. Last time things jumped to code > and then stopped.
I hear you, and I don't want to see that either. There are so many complex issues involved here, and we need documented agreements before code/implementation obscures that. Wiki is one good way to start working the issues, but even that is somewhat free-form [and getting full of opinions]. Hopefully we can discuss the issues, and start to document the agreement as agreements & build upon those. Maybe "repository" is a "standards project" (documented specs) with no direct code whatsoever. > > project? What were you hoping for when you put out that feeler? > > I was hoping we could take all the disparate repository efforts and focus > them. Ok, good. But question, do we really have disparate repository efforts? I think we generally agree on the repository, it is the tooling that varies. I wonder if that is how it ought be, keep the clients focuses on their environments and make repository interaction easy. A 'one solution fits all' client is probably less likely to suceed. > > Second, how do we keep some momentum and progress this, given the many > > different facets & ways to skin this cat. > > Agree on what the basics are and allow differing implementations. I'd rather work with folks on one implementation, but then again I can see that a single solution might not fit all environments. For example, we probably want API/client access via languages other than Java. Also, I could see (say) a Maven client being best tightly be integrated into Maven's metdata and installation mechanisms. Just because repository wants to be open/generic and not-Java-only, it would seem wrong to force that on all implementations. > Simple focussed discussion without talking about incubating projects or > adopting projects works for me. Those are separate issues. Awesome, so we'll keep those elsewhere. I beleive that there have been failed attempts at this at times before, and much as I'd love to attain the PPM (Perl Package Manager) level loft goals, I hope we can make progress in achievable stages. Thanks for your clarifications. regards, Adam