> http://repo.apache.org/apache/commons-logging/1.0.3/index.html
>
> Clearly, this is only useful to users browsing the repository,
> and therefore makes no sense to include the version information.
On index.html, wouldn't we discourage the use of this? Wouldn't we want the
HTTP server to do a d
> From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Tim Anderson wrote:
>
> >>From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >>Woops - see small correction in line.
> >>
> >>Stephen McConnell wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Tim Anderson wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >By implication - the
Tim Anderson wrote:
From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Woops - see small correction in line.
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Tim Anderson wrote:
By implication - the README is not an artifact but a feature of a
version.
Is that a reasonable conclusion?
Stephen.
Wh
version information.
-Tim
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, 10 November 2003 11:35 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Comments on URI Syntax
>
>
> Stephen McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 10/
Stephen McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 10/11/2003 10:58:09 AM:
> By implication - the README is not an artifact but a feature of a
version.
> Is that a reasonable conclusion?
I'd question the value of distributing a README as a single file.
In the maven world, we have a type called 'dis
"Tim Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 10/11/2003 10:53:47 AM:
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > > From the requirements at
> > >
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ASFRepository/Requirements:
> > > "ASF Repository shall ... allow browsing and downloadin
> From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Woops - see small correction in line.
>
> Stephen McConnell wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Tim Anderson wrote:
> >
> >>> By implication - the README is not an artifact but a feature of a
> >>> version.
> >>> Is that a reasonable conclusion?
> >>> St
Woops - see small correction in line.
Stephen McConnell wrote:
Tim Anderson wrote:
By implication - the README is not an artifact but a feature of a
version.
Is that a reasonable conclusion?
Stephen.
Why make the distinction? I view everything a project deploys as an
artifact. Some artifacts
Tim Anderson wrote:
By implication - the README is not an artifact but a feature of a version.
Is that a reasonable conclusion?
Stephen.
Why make the distinction? I view everything a project deploys as an
artifact. Some artifacts will only be useful to end users (e.g,
README, LICENSE.txt etc
> From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> Tim Anderson wrote:
>
>>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>From the requirements at
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ASFRepository/Requirements:
"ASF Repository shall ... allow browsing and
Tim Anderson wrote:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From the requirements at
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ASFRepository/Requirements:
"ASF Repository shall ... allow browsing and downloading of artifacts by
humans via normal
web browser".
Requiring a version
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > From the requirements at
> > http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ASFRepository/Requirements:
> > "ASF Repository shall ... allow browsing and downloading of artifacts by
> > humans via normal
> > web browser".
> > Requiring a versio
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From the requirements at
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ASFRepository/Requirements:
"ASF Repository shall ... allow browsing and downloading of artifacts by
humans via normal
web browser".
Requiring a version to be part of the artifact file name when the
> From the requirements at
> http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ASFRepository/Requirements:
> "ASF Repository shall ... allow browsing and downloading of artifacts by
> humans via normal
> web browser".
> Requiring a version to be part of the artifact file name when the
artifact
> is onl
> From: Michal Maczka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> [snip]
> > With the changes to the URI syntax I'm proposing, using version 1.1 of
> > commons-dbcp
> > as an example, the license would be stored at:
> > http://repo.apache.org/apache/commons-dbcp/1.1/licenses/license.html
> > not:
> >
> http://
On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 02:22, Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Jason,
>
> I think that Tim's ideas were pretty well-thought out and reflect a workable
> consensus. The changes you are making to his ideas, if I read the
> correctly, are to mandate a couple of things that he did not rule out, but
> permitte
> Was the bottom of this message eaten again? I've tried twice now but in
> the response I get back from the list my little URL example isn't
> present. Is it showing up in the messages you guys are getting?
Did you check the archives to see what is recorded there?
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebro
On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 02:23, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 02:10, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> > For I would suggest a where most projects would
> > use their FQDN and split on the dot for directory structure. Also the
> > manditory use of a version in the artifact name as even in you
[snip]
> With the changes to the URI syntax I'm proposing, using version 1.1 of
> commons-dbcp
> as an example, the license would be stored at:
> http://repo.apache.org/apache/commons-dbcp/1.1/licenses/license.html
> not:
> http://repo.apache.org/apache/commons-dbcp/1.1/licenses/license-1.1.htm
On Nov 9, 2003, at 6:48 AM, Tim Anderson wrote:
So maven and axion would appear in the repository would have groupIds
of "org.apache.maven" and "org.tigris.axion" and appear under
"/org/apache/maven/"
and "/org/tigris/axion/" respectively?
I would have had them under "/org.apache/maven" and
"/org.
> From: Jason van Zyl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> > 1. This should be written as:
> > http:/artifact[-].ext
> >as the '-' is only required if the version is present.
>
> I think the version should always be present. People will use the
> repository directly and I think that's ok
http://nagoya.apache.org/eyebrowse/[EMAIL PROTECTED]&ms
gNo=266
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, 9 November 2003 7:28 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Comments on URI Syntax
>
>
> Where is "T
Where is "Tim's Layout"?
--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
Blog: http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/dion/
Pub Key:http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/dion/public-key.asc
"Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 09/11/2003 06:22:51 PM:
> Jason,
>
> I think that Tim's ideas were pretty
Jason,
I think that Tim's ideas were pretty well-thought out and reflect a workable
consensus. The changes you are making to his ideas, if I read the
correctly, are to mandate a couple of things that he did not rule out, but
permitted to remain optional. Having them as optional does not strike m
On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 01:41, Tim Anderson wrote:
> I have a few comments on the proposed URI Syntax, from
> http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ASFRepository/URISyntax.
>
>
>Compromise URI
>
>http:/artifact-[;].ext
>For example
>http://repo.apache.org/org-apache-ant/
I have a few comments on the proposed URI Syntax, from
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?ASFRepository/URISyntax.
Compromise URI
http:/artifact-[;].ext
For example
http://repo.apache.org/org-apache-ant/1.5.1/ant-1.5.1.jar
http://repo.apache.org/org-apache-ant/1.5.1/
26 matches
Mail list logo
