If we want to study the impact on performances, I think we have to create a test case with a project creating wars and ears of several dozen of Mb. I already saw some projects like that (an EAR of 100Mb with 2 wars of 50Mb).
Arnaud Héritier Software Factory Manager eXo platform - http://www.exoplatform.com --- http://www.aheritier.net On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 2:47 AM, Igor Fedorenko <i...@ifedorenko.com> wrote: > Benjamin, > > Out of curiosity, what kind of performance difference you get with this > optimization vs without it? > > Also, I think implementation should behave the same for pom and other > artifacts. I would not want to have to troubleshoot "strange" build > failures should pom get out of sync with the rest. > > -- > Regards, > Igor > > > > Benjamin Bentmann wrote: > >> Brian Fox wrote: >> >> I'm in favor of pulling this back or changing it to check for exact >>> timestamp and size. >>> >> >> I consider both the workflow outlined by Tamás and the need for >> optimization valid points so instead of pulling it out completely I opted to >> improve the existing logic. In the next alpha of Maven 3.0, artifact >> installation is only skipped if all of the following conditions hold: >> * destination has exact same timestamp as source >> * destination has exact same length as source >> * artifact is not of type "pom" >> >> >> Benjamin >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
