On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 08:16 pm, Michal Maczka wrote:
The only purpose of type in maven is to indicate how it is processed by
the runtime. (ie plugins get installed, jars get added to classpath etc).
It does not even specify that extension as there is a M-to-M between type
and extension. ie.
From: Peter Donald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 08:16 pm, Michal Maczka wrote:
The only purpose of type in maven is to indicate how it is
processed by
the runtime. (ie plugins get installed, jars get added to
classpath etc).
It does not even specify that extension
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:04 pm, Michal Maczka wrote:
Yes - you are right they don't differ in this purpose.
But it doesn't mean that one of them is not need. I think that
repository is easily navigated
when both groupId and type directories co-exits.
I guess what I saying is why not collapse
Peter Donald wrote:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:04 pm, Michal Maczka wrote:
Yes - you are right they don't differ in this purpose.
But it doesn't mean that one of them is not need. I think that
repository is easily navigated
when both groupId and type directories co-exits.
I guess what I saying
From: Peter Donald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 06:31 pm, Tim Anderson wrote:
URI Components
--
An absolute repository URI is written as follows:
repository-uri = access-specifier / product-specifier /
artifact-specifier
For
Hi,
From: Tim Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
'type' is there to logically group artifacts, to aid users browsing
the repository. For products with many artifacts, this makes navigating
the repository easier.
So the sole purpose of this is to make navigation easier? Isn't that what
the groupID is
: Thursday, 13 November 2003 1:39 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [proposal] java artifact specifier v0.1
Hi,
From: Tim Anderson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
'type' is there to logically group artifacts, to aid users browsing
the repository. For products with many artifacts, this makes
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
Noel J. Bergman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 11/11/2003 07:33:53 AM:
Why source and not sources?
Plural form of type should be used consistently for naming
directories.
That's a bit nit-picky. Let's agree on the structure, and then worry
about
spelling. :-)
I am still against
Overview
The aim of this proposal is to specify the URI syntax for artifacts
for java-based projects. It extends the URI syntax proposal:
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]ms
gNo=308
Java project artifacts include, but are not limited to:
jars, wars, rars, tlds,
10 matches
Mail list logo
