RE: Test/Prototypical Repository

2003-11-27 Thread Tim Anderson
> From: Ben Walding [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, 25 November 2003 9:03 AM
>
> 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]
> che.org&msgId=1124258
>
[snip]

"binaries" matches existing ASF practices, for both java and C
distributions.
Also, the directory name need not be reflected in the artifact extension -
the directory is there simply to group similar artifacts.

The proposals no longer refer to a 'type' directory.

E.g, for java artifacts [1], artifact-specifier is:
  artifact-specifier = java-artifact-specifier
  java-artifact-specifier = jar-artifact | war-artifact| rar-artifact
| ear-artifact | tld-artifact | javadoc-artifact
  jar-artifact = "jars" "/" versioned-artifact-name ".jar"
  war-artifact = "wars" "/" versioned-artifact-name ".war"
  rar-artifact = "rars" "/" versioned-artifact-name ".rar"
  ear-artifact = "ears" "/" versioned-artifact-name ".ear"
  tld-specifier = "tlds" "/" versioned-artifact-name ".tld"
  javadoc-artifact = "docs" "/" versioned-artifact-name
 "-javadoc" "." arc-ext
  arc-ext = "tar.gz" | "zip" | "bzip2" | ...


-Tim

[1] http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ASFRepository/JavaArtifacts




Re: Test/Prototypical Repository

2003-11-24 Thread 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: Test/Prototypical Repository

2003-11-24 Thread Tim Anderson
Not quite. The log4j-1.2.8.zip binary should be
log4j-1.2.8-bin.zip according to
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ASFRepository/JavaArtifacts

I would expect the log4j 1.2.8 release (with debug versions of
jars and binaries) to look something like:

apache/  (organisation)
  log4j/ (project)
latest/ ->   symlink to 1.2.8
1.2.8/   (version)
  binaries/
log4j-1.2.8-bin.tar.gz
log4j-1.2.8-bin.tar.gz.md5
log4j-1.2.8-bin.tar.gz.pgp
log4j-1.2.8-dbg-bin.tar.gz
log4j-1.2.8-dbg-bin.tar.gz.md5
log4j-1.2.8-dbg-bin.tar.gz.pgp
log4j-1.2.8-bin.zip
log4j-1.2.8-bin.zip.md5
log4j-1.2.8-bin.zip.pgp
log4j-1.2.8-dbg-bin.zip
log4j-1.2.8-dbg-bin.zip.md5
log4j-1.2.8-dbg-bin.zip.pgp
  source/
log4j-1.2.8-src.tar.gz
log4j-1.2.8-src.tar.gz.md5
log4j-1.2.8-src.tar.gz.pgp
log4j-1.2.8-src.zip
log4j-1.2.8-src.zip.md5
log4j-1.2.8-src.zip.pgp
  jars/
log4j-1.2.8.jar
log4j-1.2.8.jar.md5
log4j-1.2.8.jar.pgp
log4j-1.2.8-dbg.jar
log4j-1.2.8-dbg.jar.md5
log4j-1.2.8-dbg.jar.pgp
  pgp/
KEYS
  licenses/
LICENSES.txt

- Tim


> From: Adam R. B. Jack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, 25 November 2003 6:25 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Test/Prototypical Repository
>
>
> 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: Test/Prototypical Repository

2003-11-24 Thread Nick Chalko
Look reasonable to me.
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