Tim Anderson wrote:
Good point, feel free to merge them.I have a few comments on the content of that page:
1. Not sure why the discussion and the proposals are separate, given the partial duplication of pros and cons for each.
Would prefer to see these merged.
and add your pro cons. We will need this for later, when people ask us Why, we can point them to the wiki summary.
2. Version be a mandatory component of artifact filename Pros: . Artifacts become identifiable when *downloaded* from the repository. . This is not compatible with the current ASF scheme. Neither maven, nor dist require version in the artifact filename.
Cons: . Presumes to know requirements of other repository users, for which we have no requirements.
3. Version in directory Cons: . I don't see how the need for a 'latest' symbolic link is a con. There is no uniform way at ASF at the moment to indicate the latest version. . Scheme not currently used by ASF.
4. There has been no discussion on how to cope with nightly or snapshot builds, which could change the version syntax. E.g: 1. Subdir per build: http://repo.apache.org/apache/commons-cli/nightly/20031112/... http://repo.apache.org/apache/commons-cli/nightly/20031113/...
2. Embedded in version: http://repo.apache.org/apache/commons-cli/nightly-20031112/... http://repo.apache.org/apache/commons-cli/nightly-20031113/...
I'm leaning towards the former, as browsing is simpler.
OTOH, this then leads to the possibility of "nightly",
"snapshot", "release" etc being mandatory in product-specifier:
product-specifier = organisation "/" project "/" rtype "/" version
rtype = "nightly" | "snapshot" | "release" | ...
VersionInURISytnax-----Original Message----- From: Nick Chalko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 14 November 2003 9:51 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [VOTE] Where is version in UIR Syntax
Current count. 2 For version dir with optional version on artifact name. 3 for version dir and versioned artifact name.
Make sure you voice your opinion.
Nick Chalko wrote:
Lets see where we stand on the version.http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ASFRepository/WhereIs
Please go to
and vote for the Proposal you prefer. Add pro's and con's as you see fit.
Lets see how close we are to a consensus so wee can move on to other parts of the URISyntax.
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature