Adam R. B. Jack wrote:
URL really. And it was the latest out of the WikiFolks wrote:
So here is a key focuossed issue. What should the URI look like
The latest URI discussed was
Are we discussing URI or URL? If URI, ok good .. but is this current?
The part still needs to be decided is the project name.
Since this is an ASF repo, isn't the ASF project name enough?
I think the most stable idea proposed is the java package name with -I'd prefer to stick with the ASF project name.
instead of .
I can agree, it is a lot less 'fat' than package, but does it help the user
enough? Say the user downloads a new project from CVS into their IDE, gets
started, and finds that package org.apache.xyz is missing. How do they know
that xyz is part of apache project jakarta-blah or whatever? Maybe a nice
reverse map (kinda like Gump gives) would help. I feel that project name
tends to push strongly towards client side metadata though, [or server side
queries, I guess.]
BTW: Clearly package is Java-centric. Maybe something namespaced? E.g
java:org.apache.ant or something. I'm just throwing this out, I suspectRember package is just a reverse top level domain. This is a way to ensure that a name is globably unique.
project name is right, I just believe it has issues.
More in a seperate email.
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature