> 1 - people making releases have to log into the release server
> 2 - there is no notification of files being put there
> 3 - we are already experiencing issues with where to put jars
> What if we make instead a SVN repository for releases?
Isn't that a bit heavyweight when all you appear to want is WebDAV with
access control and notification?
I just had an interesting chat with Sander about adding features to our
WebDAV support. He seems to think that it would be fairly easy to add hook
and authz support, so that authorizing access to a file system area would be
the same as we use for SVN. Also, we'd have hooks that could perform
actions when changes are made.
> In this way it would be quite ease to solve all the above issues,
> with the added benefit of keeping history automatically.
What benefit do you see to keeping the history? The contents of the files
are preserved in archive.apache.org. Which also raises the point that we
publish through the file system, and the files are available for rsync to
> This could also make it possible to make a simple bot that acts on
> these commits
We could use a hook to mirror the files into the file system, but I'm still
not seeing the benefit of storing these binaries in a BDB database.
> like for example publish the jars in a parallel
> structure that is used for the maven repo.
We've really got to work on eliminating the adjective there, and I applaud
Mark's efforts to do so.