www-repository mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brett Porter <brett.por...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Maven repository policies
Date Fri, 29 Jul 2005 02:47:59 GMT
Thanks for this Henk. Questions:

On 7/27/05, Henk P. Penning <henkp@apache.org> wrote:
>   My point of departure (assumptions) :
>   -- The cleanup problems in 'java-repository' aren't solved
>   -- If putting stuff in an repository is automated, then repository
>      cleanup should be automated at least as well

By this, do you mean the problem you refer to below or are there other
cleanup issues?

>   -- Every object X in the repository is derived from an object Y
>      in 'dist/' (not 'dist/{java,maven}-repository/').
>      If Y disappears from '/dist', X should disapear also
>   To keep things simple, I propose that for every artifact X in
>   the repository there should a file X.par, containing a pointer
>   to the parent in 'dist/'.

I'm fine with doing this. We can add a deployment hook on ASF
artifacts to push that file. By pointer, I assume it would be a URL to
the original, which a script would replace http:// with /www/ to find
the file location.

Just for completeness, what about the reverse relationship?
- distributions are deployed alongside the jars in the repository
- elements in /dist/ are symlinks to the elements in the repository
- to pull a release, remove it from the repository
- scripts remove dead symlinks

Advantages: it's easier for Maven built projects, and it would
encourage other projects to ensure their distributions are in the
Maven repository rather than chasing them later. It's a bit cleaner
than adding .par files to everything.

Disadvantages: it's more maven centric so it is inconvenient/not
relevant to some projects and that means there are inconsistent places
to deploy to for different projects

I expect as we move shell accounts off minotaur we will need some way
to publish releases, and that could take care of  establishing the
layout though without inconveniencing anyone doing the deployment.

What are your thoughts?

>   I think that would be a nice policy for stuff that is rsynced
>   to 100+ mirrors.

Absolutely. Thanks!


View raw message