[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACE-316?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13630169#comment-13630169
]
Paul Bakker commented on ACE-316:
---------------------------------
I still don't really have a feeling how much development time a move to R5
repositories would cost, so it's hard to decide if this is or isn't something
we should do.
Having support for the requirements model seems interesting, ACE could be a lot
smarter about selecting the correct artefacts when creating
features/distributions. On the other hand you could argue that this is really
not something that should be done by a provisioning server, but should be done
development time. In that case it would make sense to be able to upload
packages with a set of artefacts to ACE instead of single bundles.
Before starting work on the other issues it would be good to spend some time to
investigate what should be done exactly if we would move to R5 repositories.
> Layout the OBR filesystem differently.
> --------------------------------------
>
> Key: ACE-316
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACE-316
> Project: ACE
> Issue Type: Question
> Components: OBR
> Reporter: Marcel Offermans
> Assignee: Bram de Kruijff
>
> Currently, the OBR uses a single folder to store all artifacts. That does not
> scale too well as OS specific directory limits might interfere. We should
> implement a more hierarchical storage format, such as: <BSN>/<version> or
> even one where each part of the BSN becomes a folder.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
