It seems that the copyFileIfModified implementation should be changed. Since
currently it only checks if the source timestamp is newer. Maybe this should be
changed to check for the timestamps not equal (and maybe size not equal also)
instead of just a newer timestamp. That would allow the optimization, but also
handle the use case described in the jira issue.
Tamás Cservenák wrote:
Well, how about a "feature branch" (short lived branches)? Or you modify all
the modules to have different GAV upon branch? This is kinda nonsense to me,
since I branch it to do some feature that I know will get back into trunk.
"Renaming" (changing GAVs of modules, maybe a LOT of them) is PITA in this
case, IMHO.
But even then, I dislike very much the idea that Maven "optimizes" this, and
does less then I tell it to do ;)
~t~
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 3:18 PM, Arnaud HERITIER <[email protected]> wrote:
You have the same version in 2 branches in a project ?
For me it is a bad practice
Each branch has it own version to avoid those sort of conflict.
Arnaud Héritier
Software Factory Manager
eXo platform - http://www.exoplatform.com
---
http://www.aheritier.net
2009/12/7 Tamás Cservenák <[email protected]>
Hi there,
this is mainly about this issue:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-4368
It caused a lot of grief (and lost hours) to me, until I figured what
happens on me.
IMHO, no "optimization" like this should be done against local
repository.
Please undo it.
Thanks,
~t~
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
