Re: adding jaxme jars

[Ben Walding]

One side effect of changing groupIds around after they have been 
mirrored is that ibiblio's maven repo now has jaxme stuff slotted into 
both /jaxme and /apache-jaxme.  Once someone has decided which way it 
should be, we'll need to remove the old cruft.  Mark, I leave this chore 
in your hands!

Cheers,
Ben
robert burrell donkin wrote:
i have a jelly tag library that uses jaxme (the apache JAXB 
implementation currently under incubation) that i'd like to commit 
into jakarta-commons. AIUI the right way to make ASF jars available 
for use in mavenized builds is to upload them into the apache repository.

is this correct and is there any documentation about the right way to 
do this?

- robert

Re: Test/Prototypical Repository

[Ben Walding]

I'm still not convinced that "binaries" is better than "binary" as a 
type directory.

See my original comments that must have lost in the ether (section 2) - 
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]&msgId=1124258

Cheers,
Ben
Adam R. B. Jack wrote:
All,
As a way to force me to review the specification and attempt to implement
I've started a knock up repository at:
   http://www.apache.org/~ajack/testrepo
[If we think this is a good idea we can ask infrastructure@ for a location
we can all write to.]
Can folks tell me if this repository fits the specification? I had problem
with the top part.
regards
Adam
--
Experience Sybase Technology...
http://www.try.sybase.com
 

Re: [proposal] java artifact specifier v0.1

[Ben Walding]

1. Magical chopping of the groupId into parts and then arbitrarily 
dropping the first one, most of the time.

  I'm in favour of just using groupId over organisation + id.
  And I don't particularly like dropping org / com, the DNS is a good 
way to enforce uniqueness - let's use it.

  I see little advantage in not mandating that groupId be globally 
unique - the reverse domain name. The number of crappy little components 
(eg "ftp") that I've had to magically name to something else on ibiblio 
is just frustrating.  This will only get worse as you put more crap into 
the repository. And there will be crap... lots of it... eg. sourceforge 
currently has 70,925 projects...

-
2. Pluralisation of types
Historically within Maven we have had the jars directory and little else 
(poms/ licenses are only infrequently used - and typically not by tools)

When we specify a dependency, it looks something like this

  commons-lang
  jar
  1.0.3

This is all well and good for things which are pluralised by adding 
"s"... not so good otherwise.

Hence I'd prefer if we didn't go with pluralised names for the type. 
It'll just require another mapping array in every tool which says...

jar => jars, binary => binaries, source => source
as opposed to just using type
jar => jar, binary => binary, source => source
How can I justify this?  What is the type of artifacts in this folder? 
They are of type jar. They are not of type jars.

This is more of a nuisance than a real problem however.

It's good to see progress being made.
Cheers,
Ben