subproject URI naming convention

2003-12-01 Thread Tim Anderson
The URI proposal [1] doesn't provide explicit support for subprojects - the assumption being that these will be encoded in the product-specifier portion of the URI: repository-uri = access-specifier / product-specifier / version-specifier / artifact-specifier

Re: subproject URI naming convention

2003-12-01 Thread Stephen McConnell
Tim Anderson wrote: The URI proposal [1] doesn't provide explicit support for subprojects - the assumption being that these will be encoded in the product-specifier portion of the URI: repository-uri = access-specifier / product-specifier / version-specifier /

RE: subproject URI naming convention

2003-12-01 Thread Matt Kurjanowicz
Hi all, I've been lurking for a little while now, and appreciate all the work you guys have done working on this spec. I agree with both Tim and Stephen in regards to below. I believe that there should be a *mandatory* subproject descriptor because it allows for more flexibility with regards to

Re: subproject URI naming convention

2003-12-01 Thread Nick Chalko
Understanding that we are at the detail level and any of this will work. The two questions up are org/proj and allowing and/or forcing org/proj/sub-proj. I have made the case in the past for not allowing arbitrary / in part names because it makes the URI hard to parse. Not hard to generate