« Return to Thread: webdav wagon changes

Re: webdav wagon changes

by Jason van Zyl-2 :: Rate this Message:

On 20-May-08, at 9:17 AM, Brian E. Fox wrote:

> I agree a single provider is less confusing. What if jackrabbit is
> the trunk and we make slide a branch? If the api hasn't changed,
> then it should be ok.
>

It's not the API that matters, that has to be the same. It's the way
it behaves. You lose nothing have two providers and not changing the
way everyone uses it now while having the option to use something new.
You have no idea what the behavior may, or may not, push on to users
of WebDAV. Just avoid the potential problem of calling it the same
thing, finding out there is a problem, trying to roll it back, and by
some weirdism in maven-artifact users get the wrong provider. Don't
make it more complicated then it has to be. People can choose the new
implementation when they want.

We have enough problems with users complaining about the auto-magical
update. Do we really want to explain "Oh we called it the same thing
but we completely changed the implementation while it was in beta."

> -----Original Message-----
> From: nbeyer@... [mailto:nbeyer@...] On Behalf Of Nathan
> Beyer
> Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 10:26 AM
> To: wagon-dev@...
> Subject: Re: webdav wagon changes
>
> I'd prefer a single 'webdav' provider. If there are concerns of
> passivity or
> correctness, then I'd suggest a call out for help testing it, which
> could
> identify any possible regressions. The slide-impl is pretty bad and
> I'd be
> willing to live and work through any bumps for a long-term win.
>
> If there's a SNAPSHOT or a way of building one and some quick
> instructions
> on how to replace the slide impl in 2.0.9, I'd certainly be able to
> start
> some larger-scale integration testing.
>
> -Nathan
>
> On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 12:43 AM, Brett Porter <brett@...>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just finished some work to migrate the webdav provider from slide
>> to
>> jackrabbit using the patch from James Dumay. Slide leaked some file
>> handles
>> and is an unsupported project. In the process I added some more
>> tests around
>> transfer listeners as some providers weren't registering them
>> correctly.
>>
>> Jason suggested on IRC that it might be better to retain the slide
>> webdav
>> provider as-is and move the new code to wagon-webdav-jackrabbit.
>>
>> Any opinions on this before I go ahead and do that?
>>
>> I'm thinking of still renaming the slide wagon to wagon-webdav-
>> slide in
>> such a case, so that on upgrading the version they are forced to
>> choose, but
>> still have access to the slide one if needed.
>>
>> The only issue I can see is it clashing with the other one built in
>> to
>> 2.0.9 for the plexus 'dav' component, but I haven't tried to see if
>> it wins
>> out correctly if used.
>>
>> BTW, I've also brought the SCM provider in to trunk from the
>> sandbox - it's
>> apparent from JIRA that a number of people are using it, so I think
>> we
>> should support it for the limited use cases it currently supports.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Brett
>>
>> --
>> Brett Porter
>> brett@...
>> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: wagon-dev-unsubscribe@...
>> For additional commands, e-mail: wagon-dev-help@...
>>
>>

Thanks,

Jason

----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------

Selfish deeds are the shortest path to self destruction.

-- The Seven Samuari, Akira Kirosawa

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: wagon-dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: wagon-dev-help@...

« Return to Thread: webdav wagon changes