On 30/08/2007, at 2:56 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
On 29 Aug 07, at 8:20 AM 29 Aug 07, Brett Porter wrote:
On 30/08/2007, at 1:11 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Like with any other artifact (including if versions are split
across multiple repositories), it searches them all in sequence if
they aren't found in one.
This seems like a good practice to you?
Primary in one repository and secondary artifacts in another?
The use case seems valid to me, yes.
Metadata misalignment, mis-configuration, who know what other
problems lurk and just the general practice of doing this.
When I ran the test case, there's only one set of metadata for a
given version (it sits in the main repository) - which makes sense to
me. (But even if they were updated on each, they'd all merge just fine).
Does anyone else think this is a terrible idea? If we allow this
then there is no going back.
Yah, I'd love to hear it if anyone can pick holes in it, as I don't
want to steer down any bad tracks repository wise either. So, if
anyone has any specific examples of where this would be
undesirable... shoot :)
Thanks,
Brett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
