> > >However, I don't think this is unreasonable. There is no requirement > > >that tools be able to parse URIs to extract meta-data.
Say who? There is a requirement that repositories "work" (at some minimum level) without metadata, especially since we aren't specifying metadata. Without a parsable URI (or parsable URL) how do tools read a repository to do things like "clean oldest nightly/snapshot, but leave all releases", "download latest release" or even the basics "determine/display contents", "show basic contents" (irrespective of version/type). If we are shooting for humans, not tools, why bother changing what we have? Humans can grok it all, we don't need any "standard". If we are proposing a standard, there has to be a valid purpose for it -- and having a standard that isn't structured for computer processing seems setting the bar pointlessly low. For me, the strongest argument for tooling (other purely than saving admins effort) is download + verify (MD5/whatever). A human is far more likely NOT to do it, they'll right click in their browser, save and use. I think we ought have a structured repository so we can write administration tools, but also timer save "download" plugins that do the requisite verifications and keep our users secure. Again, a specification that limits/breaks tooling is wasting of huge benefit. regards, Adam
