I envisaged:
. formal builds to be reproducible builds, such as those
built against a label. E.g:
"1.0"
"0.9-rc1"
"release/1.2"
"release/1.0beta2"
. interim builds to be any build against the codebase
at a particular time. E.g:
"snapshot/1.0/20031213"
"nightly/1.0-beta2.3/20031210"
However, there is some overlap - an interim build could be labelled,
but not represent a formal build. For that reason, the timestamp
is optional:
interim-build = interim-build-designation "/" version
[ "/" interim-version ]
interim-build-designation = "interim" | "nightly" | "snapshot" | ...
interim-version = timestamp | latest
timestamp = YYYYMMDD ["." HHMM [SS]]
latest = "latest"
If milestone builds are formal builds, then the repository for "commons-foo"
might look like:
http://repo.apache.org/apache/commons-foo/
1.0-milestone1/
binaries/
source/
jars/
...
1.0-milestone2/
1.0-rc1/
1.0-rc2/
1.0/
1.1-milestone1/
1.1-milestone2/
nightly/
1.0/
20031112/
binaries/
source/
jars/
...
20031113/
20031114/
If they are interim builds, built off a label:
http://repo.apache.org/apache/commons-foo/
1.0/
binaries/
source/
jars/
...
1.0-rc1/
1.0-rc2/
interim/
1.0-milestone1/
binaries/
source/
jars/
...
1.0-milestone2/
1.1-milestone1/
1.1-milestone2/
nightly/
At this stage, I have no real preference for either
use - a tool can unambiguously locate them either way.
-Tim
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nick Chalko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, 29 November 2003 2:48 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: URI proposals updated
>
>
> Excelent work. I think this a very manageable set of specs.
>
> I have one question for the
> http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ASFRepository/CommonB
> uildVersionSpecifier
>
> MileStone builds (ala eclipse) are they a "formal" or interm.
> Interm I think.
>
> R
> Nick
>
>
>
>
>
