Thank you Jason : If 3.x local repository is not safe for concurrent access, how does maven3 implement parallel builds ( -T switch ) ( maybe they decide on teh parallelism by making sure that there is no concurrent read/write access on teh repository *for the same* artifacts ? )
--sony On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Jason van Zyl <ja...@sonatype.com> wrote: > Apache Maven 3.x does not have a local repository implementation that is > safe for concurrent access. > > Maven 3.x is intended to be compatible with Maven 2.x in all respects. A > Maven 2.x build should just work in Maven 3.x > > On Apr 15, 2011, at 11:13 AM, Sony Antony wrote: > > > I read somewhere that during maven 2, teh repository was not safe for > > concurrent access. > > ( If multiple maven builds access teh same repository, it might end up > being > > corrupt ) > > > > However, Im not sure if this unsafety arose because of teh way maven2 > > accessed teh repository or if the repository layout itself was inherently > > flawed for concurrent access. > > > > Now that we are moving to maven 3, I learned ( from here ) that it still > > uses ~/.m2 for repository. > > > > 1. Does that mean that maven3 also has teh same concurrency access issue > ? > > On teh otehr hand, maven3 supports parallel builds. If the repository is > not > > thread safe, how is it possible to implement concurrent access. > > > > 2. Is maven3 safe to use with multiple seperate builds all pointing to > teh > > same repository ? > > > > 3. Can I use maven2 repository for a maven3 build without having to > > redownload any of the artifacts that are already there ? > > > > Thanks > > --sony > > Thanks, > > Jason > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Jason van Zyl > Founder, Apache Maven > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl > --------------------------------------------------------- > > {script:nopre:"/Users/jvanzyl/signature/signature.sh"} > > > >
