On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 22:26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Well, let's make sure that we get input from the httpd release folks before
> > we re-design the layout of the library. I just want to make sure that we
> > have a consensus across projects that everyone can live with, not just Java
> > projects, and which works for the full spectrum of projects.
> > --- Noel
> I totally second that. The repository concept should support the entire
> gambit of artifacts that can be generated. It must be language and
> application neutral hence very extensible. There should be some caution when
> deciding upon a rigid repository structure that must have the artifact type
> as a path component. Something tells me this could lead to trouble.
I honestly doubt that to be the case and time may tell, but so far I
haven't seen it as an obstacle insofar as Maven goes. Additionally the
format internally is configurable to Maven, as I assume you are speaking
of Maven, but have only exposed the one format for simplicity. Also any
sort of decoration upon the simple can be used for more sophisticated
> On a side note:
> Taging artifacts using attributes can help acheive this as well. It's
> another potential tool that could be very liberating to those designing the
> repository and its conventions. I would try to keep the file structure very
> generic while using artifact attributes and some queriable engine to ask for
> the right kinds of artifacts.
Possibly, but I don't think designing the layout for a repository
requires a grand engineering effort. I think a directory structure
requiring simple http as the base is simple and works. But simple is not
limited to my mind. I have thought about the case where a deployed
application is nothing more than a descriptor coupled with a mechanism
to pull all required artifacts together to enable the target system and
I haven't seen any evidence that would indicate that a directory
structure with http/s couldn't work.
> Both webdav/deltaV and directories can play a role here. As you know you can
> associate properties/attributes with artifacts using webdav. You can also
> acheive this by using a directory as the relational engine with a webserver
> as the artifact/content store. Nice thing is, you can wrap the JNDI around
> it all too and switch URL schemes to do different things: use LDAP for
> relational queries on attributes and use http/ftp for content retrieval. The
> neat thing is we can use the protocol that best suites the activity.
For the base repository notion I would probably avoid any ancillary
tools as much as possible. I too want to build sophisticated systems but
I don't believe that requires an overly sophisticated repository.
> My $0.02
P.S paragraphs in your messages are coming out on one line without
wrapping which makes responding a little more difficult as I have to
stretch out your response across two monitors :-)
Jason van Zyl
In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational
and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it.
-- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society