Re: webdav wagon changes

>
> 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@...
>