Three comments (probably all repetitions) :

1) Perl/Python have a package index/identification approaches. We might want
a similar concept, i.e. queriable metadata that associates keywords/concepts
with packages/groups/artefacts. These concepts could be language sensitive
(so either different, or extended). These concepts/approaches could be
argued as complimentary/orthogonal to repository, i.e. not in scope.

2) I am already overwhelmed by this information produced just around the
discussion of the URL (location) of files, and the differences in needs for
Java and/or others. We've not even started on the meat of the issues with
this venture. My gut tells me that having a repo effort, with per language
sub-efforts is the only way to achieve success & not a
one-size-doesn't-fit-all-kludge. [I could be wrong, but I point to 1 above
for this.]

3) Maybe we just phase things, and be happy with that. Maybe phase one is
the Maven-like/Avalon-like repository on an HTTP server w/ minimal metadata.
However hard we discuss the issues I doubt we'll get the "real world"
experience maintaining a repository (with mirrors, and such) unless we roll
up our sleeves and manage one on Apache hardware w/ partner mirrors. I think
prototyping and phasing are keys here.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Anou Manavalan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 8:01 AM
Subject: RE: Proposals

> I am not sure if my earlier mail made it to the list, I really want to see
> different view of the URI
> http://<host>/<group>/project/<type>/<id>-<version>[-<type>][.ext]
> It seems like we are inclining towards the already existing "Maven" kind
> URI. It has already proven its existence, instead of repeating the same
> thing, may be we should try to find a better one. How to make it more user
> friendly, better than what we have.
> As I stated earlier, most of the project names don't say what they are
> trying to solve, and there are a lot of different projects that try to
> almost the same problem like xerces, crimson... (we could have lot of
> projects with new ones coming in, but they all aim to solve one specific
> thing)  why not group them all together, make it easy for the user to go
> one place and decide on what they want. And the user need not know the
> project per say and all they need to know is what they want to solve.
> regards,
> -Anou
> >Subject: RE: Proposals
> >Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 12:43:17 +1100
> >
> >No.
> >
> >In Maven, it's the artifact type, e.g. jar(s), war(s) exe(s).
> >
> >I thought we'd been over this one before.
> >--
> >dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
> >Blog:
> >Pub Key:
> >
> >
> >"Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/11/2003 11:01:29 AM:
> >
> > > > http://<host>/<group>/jars/<id>[-<version>][-<type>].ext
> > >
> > > Is jars/ to be <platform>/ for the non-Java crowd?
> > >
> > >    --- Noel
> >
> _________________________________________________________________
> Is your computer infected with a virus?  Find out with a FREE computer
> scan from McAfee.  Take the FreeScan now!

Reply via email to