Thx Herve for the hint. The size of the local cahe is 40 MB. All core plugins [1] and Packaging (ear, ejb, jar, rar and war) are included in the range [3.0, 4.0). Two plugins (verifier:2.0+ and rar:1.0+) do not have this range.
[1] https://maven.apache.org/plugins/ On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 10:47 PM Hervé Boutemy <hbout...@apache.org> wrote: > Le mercredi 30 octobre 2019 14:55:46 CET, vous avez écrit : > > Agree we should publish with an asf account and make it part of the > release > > process. > > That said I still fail to see how you can add a relevant cache. Maybe > take > > the time to review plugin version in a few asf projects (let say > > maven-surefire, geronimo-openapi and spark) and check out if it works to > > cache anything. > if we choose one precise version of each plugin, we will never get the > version > used by a project: IMHO, we need to choose a range for each plugin > https://maven.apache.org/plugins/ > Something like dependency:resolve-plugins should be able to do the job. > > With a range per plugin, I'd love to see the size of the initial local > repository > At least, using such an image would require minimal efforts from users, > particularly on CI servers > > Regards, > > Hervé > > > > > 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 mer. 30 oct. 2019 à 14:31, Tibor Digana <tibordig...@apache.org> a > > > > écrit : > > > Stephen, yeah something like you do in your scrip but it must not be a > > > personal owner. Even Carloss is person who makes this deployment to > > > DockerHub but his images are used by the entire world and we should > decide > > > whether we would agree with him to have such images under his > > > responsibility or our responsibility as the Apache group. Then the > script > > > would be official and we can cut the release of Maven and the Docker > image > > > will be ready for the downloads together with the Maven distribution. > So > > > the users will always know that it is consistent deployment and they > > > wouldn't expect that the image is missing for the new version. > > > > > > So here we should decide on who will be the deployer of these images > with > > > the cache. And the technical solution is smaller problem I would say. > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 10:28 AM Stephen Connolly < > > > > > > stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed 30 Oct 2019 at 08:21, Tibor Digana <tibordig...@apache.org> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > It's the situation when you have maven plugins in repo and it means > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > all custom plugins/deps can be still downloaded as before. > > > > > Nothing exists like this in the world and we are talking about the > > > > > approaches. > > > > > > > > Cough cough cough > > > > > > > https://github.com/stephenc/docker-git-java8-maven-vim/blob/168b9968deae41 > > > 8ca3fd63c63038e896255c6fe8/Dockerfile#L50> > > > > There are issues, but it does shave a bit of time... though we end up > > > > adding our common dependencies into the seed pom so that it is an > > > > > > effective > > > > > > > speed up > > > > > > > > > I added Karl, Herve and Stephen in CC because we talked about this > > > > > > issue > > > > > > > > in ASF CON and Twitter. > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 6:36 AM Romain Manni-Bucau < > > > > > > > > rmannibu...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > >> Hi Tibor, > > > > >> > > > > >> It has two issues: > > > > >> > > > > >> 1. It will not be the right plugin versions in 90% of the cases > > > > > > (except > > > > > > > >> demo ;)) > > > > >> 2. It will miss all custom plugins > > > > >> > > > > >> Now question is: what happens if you mount your local repo when > > > > > > running > > > > > > > >> docker? It works as expected. Means we could use a custom > entrypoint > > > > >> printing a warning banner if it is not done probably instead of > > > > > > > > incrasing > > > > > > > > >> the image size without being sure to reach the original goal. > > > > >> > > > > >> Wdyt? > > > > >> > > > > >> Romain > > > > >> > > > > >> Le mer. 30 oct. 2019 à 02:03, Tibor Digana < > tibordig...@apache.org> a > > > > >> > > > > >> écrit : > > > > >> > If you use Docker images with Maven with no mapping of cache to > the > > > > >> > volumes, you may notice that Maven downloads the plugins for the > > > > > > build > > > > > > > >> > lifecycle. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > This slows down the build because a lot of artifacts and plugins > > > > >> > are > > > > >> > initially downloaded. > > > > >> > This takes 50 seconds which might be even longer than the > > > > >> > productive > > > > >> > > > > >> build > > > > >> > > > > >> > itself (compiler, package, ...). > > > > >> > > > > > >> > We discussed this topic with Herve and Karl at the Apache CON > 2019 > > > > > > the > > > > > > > >> last > > > > >> > > > > >> > time. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Sometime the presentations were funny because the audience had > to > > > > > > > > wait a > > > > > > > > >> > minute while the console was black where the Maven was > downloading > > > > > > the > > > > > > > >> > plugins in the background. > > > > >> > Nobody was sure what happened that time, whether the console > hanged > > > > > > or > > > > > > > >> the > > > > >> > > > > >> > Cloud server hanged, or another issue happened with the network. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > I made a test and triggered the default lifecycle on Maven and I > > > > >> > > > > >> realized > > > > >> > > > > >> > that the cache was really very little, cca 12 MB. > > > > >> > So this little cache in the container would save 50 seconds > which > > > > >> > is > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > >> > improvement we are discussing. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > From the use point of view, the user would use a new base image > ` > > > > >> > 3.6.2-jdk-14-prefetched` which is my idea. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > There are multiple technical solutions (range of plugins, extra > > > > >> > pom, > > > > >> > internal Maven plugin versions, etc). > > > > >> > > > > > >> > We understood that the best idea would be to have the image with > > > > >> > the > > > > >> > > > > >> cache > > > > >> > > > > >> > in new Docker images produced by Carloss Sanchez. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > We are discussing this topic in [1] but we do not have a > consensus > > > > > > on > > > > > > > >> who > > > > >> > > > > >> > will develop the Docker scripts and how. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > We can continue here and we can propose a solution. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > [1] https://github.com/carlossg/docker-maven/issues/130 > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Cheers > > > > >> > Tibor17 > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Sent from my phone > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
