Am Sam, 2003-06-28 um 22.47 schrieb Stephen McConnell: > Jakob: > > What is in place is basically something that lets us leverage other > repositories that follow the maven pattern. However, it does not go as > far as I want. The main thing missing is policy concerning dowloading. > I would like to see the addition of the policy applied to validation of > jar files - for example, should the jar file be signed (PKI style as per > JNLP) or should it be signed using PGP (Apache policy). My own > preference is for fully signed jar files and validation against a local > truct cert store. > sounds interesting. Some time ago I have looked a bit into the maven repsoitory impl. Looks like it should be extensible. A common java repository spec would be a great idea too. (and a stricter spec of the optional package versioning would be great too).
Sidenote: A free software PGP implementation was once done by cryptix.org. thanks for your insights, Jakob > Jakob Praher wrote: > > >Am Sam, 2003-06-28 um 07.20 schrieb Stephen McConnell: > > > > > >>Stephen McConnell wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>>Merlin not provides support > >>> > >>> > >>Correction : "Merlin *now* provides support ... " > >>*sigh* > >> > >> > > > >great work. Thanks - will check it out. > >I followed some of the threads recently, and am very keen to get a time > >window ( hopefully in july ) to work through all that great stuff. > > > >Actutally I haven't looked at your code, but I am interested how you > >implemented it. More like the Artifact thing as in the maven repository > >or with additional meta-data attached (like packages.list or something). > > > >Regarding Library- or LoadableUnits (haven't forgot our discussion some > >months ago): > > > >Currently I am wondering whether the optional versioning spec is > >detailed enough to make a general LU support of non componentized > >packages - but having looked at some of the MANIFESTs I got very > >dissappointed as nobody uses a stanardized way to name their extensions > >(xalan uses '/' as separators and so on .. ) > > > >* Are you aware of some sort of standard way to name > >specifications/extensions ? (I thought that it was the package name) > > > >I think it would be very helpful, if we had such a thing. > > > >and something else: > > > >Having subscribed to the javaone online (I missed it this year - its a > >pretty long journey from Austra) - I found out that the new meta > >facility in the language (jsr 175) will be called Annotations. I like > >the name, since attribute is *very* overloaded in oo terms (corba, uml, > >jmx use attribute to refer to a field .. ) > >Perhaps we should stick to that thing too, when talking about custom > >meta data in avalon. > > > >-- Jakob > > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
