On 29/02/2008, at 8:45 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
Dynamic collections have been there for a while. And why is
deploy:deploy-file a concern, and for webdav. This will be the case
for all providers. FTP deploy doesn't work out of the box either,
should be start adding everything because they need a POM to use
deploy file with FTP. Probably not.
It's just purely demand based thing. As you said last year "Sure, why
not drop it in. I think people use it quite a bit. "
The other issue is why isn't just plain PUT fine. I don't know how
it ever came to be that we pushed WebDAV.
For people running webdav repositories where PUT is not sufficient
because you have to create a whole bunch of directories first.
As I said before - that's fine, but it should be working before the
first alpha so that there's no regression in functionality.
It's never been there so it's not a regression because no one has
ever used it or done it.
I meant between 2.0.9 and 2.1, since you said it was fine to leave it
in 2.0.x.
If you need a POM to deploy-file that's fine. We're not going to
start pushing in all the providers so people can do this. Pushing it
all in the core, sprinkling the logic everywhere we need to handle
the JARs especially the httpclient mess of commons-* is not very
appealing.
I'm not really sure what you mean. It's all properly isolated now and
there was no code changes to make this happen other than the few lines
to add them to the filter, so I don't really see what the problem is?
I personally don't care, I use the lightweight http provider to deploy
to Archiva and it works just fine.
- Brett
--
Brett Porter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
