"Adam R. B. Jack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 31/10/2003 09:10:44 AM:
> Folks wrote:
> Are we discussing URI or URL? If URI, ok good .. but is this current?
> I thought it was more like (w/ pseudo-regexp notation):
'jars' is the <type> of the thing. e.g. jars, tlds, wars, ears, exes, bins
> I'm not sure I like all of that (and yes, it is Java centric) but as I
> understand it, it is how the repositories currently look.
>From my angle they're not java centric, it's just that most of the content
is java executable code. But, for example, ibiblio has a licenses
directory where jars would be, and distributions, poms etc.
> 1) I could cope w/o 'jars' if that made it less Java centric.
AFAIC, it's the type of the artifact.
> 2) I don't like the redundant /<version>/ -- it leads to the needs for
> symlinks for latest (or similar). I prefer it in the filename. Once
> get copied out of a repository it is good to see what they are, fully
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting