Resolver TransferListener implementations are stateless (or ideally should be), everything they need is in event. Unsure what "interleaving" issue you mention, as now listener emits two (mutually exclusive) events only: - transfer succeeded - transfer failed
T On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 1:55 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Doesn't it move the issue to the "next event"? Guess it should be fully > customizable or not at all. > Also it keeps the logging interleaving issue - this is why the logger > solution sounded neat to me. > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < > https://github.com/rmannibucau> | > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book > < > https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance > > > > > Le lun. 20 févr. 2023 à 13:22, Tamás Cservenák <[email protected]> a > écrit : > > > Created this PR as "experiment": > > https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/1003 > > > > It will produce "nearly" the upcoming Maven 3.9.1 and has a dirty hack: > > -Dmaven.resolver.transfer.logging=full(as before)|half(the new default) > > > > As expected, one IT fails that asserts the "DownloadING" log line that > this > > Pr removes. > > > > build it, test drive it. > > > > Personally, I do like this new lighter output.... > > > > Thanks > > T > > > > On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 9:21 PM Romain Manni-Bucau < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Maybe we should just move the console listener to a logger usage with > > this > > > pattern $classname.event, this way configuring the loggers enables any > > > customization and we dont get fishy console outputs too depending the > > slf4j > > > binding. > > > > > > Le dim. 19 févr. 2023 à 20:57, Benjamin Marwell <[email protected]> > a > > > écrit : > > > > > > > Sadly, --ntp also disables upload progress and ANY information > > associated > > > > with this. > > > > Maybe it would be beneficial to have an option for that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 19 Feb 2023, 18:26 Michael Osipov, <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Am 2023-02-19 um 18:17 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau: > > > > > > Not sure we can find an agreement on this topic, both opinions > are > > > very > > > > > > valid and depends the persona/case so let's keep our default > while > > it > > > > is > > > > > > customizable easily it is fine IMHO. > > > > > > > > > > Good point, I could imagine that one could introduce > > > --transfer-progress > > > > > <value>, similar Tamás did with Resolver transports. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
