+1 for fast per default 2013/2/11 Kristian Rosenvold <kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com>: > The "fast" mode is twice as fast at "slow", which I see quite a few people > enjoy (these plugins can be quite slow). Initially I measured the increase > in size to be 3-5%, which was why I just flipped default to "fast". It > turned out the projects I measured were rather best-case, and a little more > experience seems to indicate a 10-15% size increase being more of the norm. > > So I have flipped the default back to "slow". Which mode is "best" depends > largely on your perspective ;) I'd say fast beats slow any day of the > week, but I think 10-15% is a bit too much ;) > > BTW; The main part of the increase is actually caused by some jars in > central having little or no compression applied to them. There might be > room for making the compression header sniffing even smarter (recompress if > all files in the zip have "stored" compression type; should be possible to > implement with only performance loss for those few files). > > If anyone wants to have a shot at that I'll happily review such a patch ;) > > Kristian > > > > > 2013/2/8 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > >> Hi guys, >> >> do you have figures regarding size and execution time? slower/bigger >> doesn't speak that much to help to choose a default config ;) >> >> *Romain Manni-Bucau* >> *Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>* >> *Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*< >> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/> >> *LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau* >> *Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau* >> >> >> >> 2013/2/8 Anders Hammar <and...@hammar.net> >> >> > In general, I think that the default value should be whatever works in >> most >> > cases. Then we could have params for tweaking this (for better >> performance >> > e.g. in specific cases), but it would be up to the user to do this. >> > So, in this specific case, I think the default should be to recompress so >> > that it always works even though it might be a bit slower. >> > >> > /Anders >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 9:58 PM, Kristian Rosenvold < >> > kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > > A lot of you seemed to have realized that the latest version of war and >> > > assembly have chosen the "fast" option over the "compact" option; and >> you >> > > actually seem to like it ;) >> > > >> > > https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MASSEMBLY-639 has been filed and >> > "fixed" >> > > which will revert the behaviour back to "slow" for both war and >> assembly, >> > > So what do you think ? >> > > >> > > >> > > Kristian >> > > >> > >>
-- Olivier Lamy Talend: http://coders.talend.com http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
