+1 to Russell’s point and thanks Andre for bringing up the topic. I’d hesitate to change the default now because people probably are depending on the default, but I wouldn’t object to a shift in the default at a major release.
Andy LoPresto [email protected] [email protected] PGP Fingerprint: 70EC B3E5 98A6 5A3F D3C4 BACE 3C6E F65B 2F7D EF69 > On Feb 2, 2017, at 8:27 AM, Russell Bateman <[email protected]> wrote: > > Maven profiles could be used to sort this out, one for just the zip, another > for just the tarball and a third, maybe the default, to continue working the > way it has been working. > > On 02/02/2017 09:09 AM, Aldrin Piri wrote: >> I think this could be useful. Only caveat is that I'm sure there are folks >> in the community that have automated processes that make use of these >> binaries. >> >> From the dev standpoint, I could see a profile that disables the assembly >> from happening such that the build occurs as it does now unless folks >> explicitly want to avoid it. Regardless of implementation, can see why it >> would be helpful. >> >> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 9:29 AM, Andre <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> devs, >>> >>> Currently calling 'mvn clean install' creates a ZIP, a TAR.GZ and a >>> directory containing the same code. This leads to wasted disk space and a >>> lot of wasted disk writes (something that a lot of folks using SSDs prefer >>> to avoid). >>> >>> Would anyone oppose the idea of moving the ZIP and TAR.GZ assemblies into a >>> "release" profile (or whatever name we agree to). This way we could >>> maintain the directory "format" (which I suspect most of us use during >>> development), while still providing a convenient way of creating the ZIP >>> and TAR.GZ packages. >>> >>> >>> Depending on the feedback I will be happy to raise the JIRA and work on it. >>> >>> Cheers >
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
