On 15/09/2010, at 8:30 PM, Em DauPhu wrote: > I asked the same question on the maven mailing list and I got the > following answer: > > "Yes, first local and remote maven repository doesn't contain the same > metadata. > And by the way, accessing a local repository by many instances isn't > concurrent-safe (at least, in maven 2, I don't know precisely what's been > done for maven 3, particularly along the parallel build evolution). So, both > must be avoided. > > You also better want to isolate every hudson build from each other, having a > local repository by job. And wiping those jobs regularly. > http://www.sonatype.com/people/2009/01/maven-continuous-integration-best-practices/ > <http://www.sonatype.com/people/2009/01/maven-continuous-integration-best-practices/>And > a specific setting for hudson on my blog: > http://batmat.net/blog/post/2009/10/09/[Hudson]-How-to-set-a-private-maven-repository-by-job-and-easily-be-able-to-delete-them > > Cheers" > > If somebody from here have a different opinion, I'm still interested.
Nope, that's correct. Technically, it will mostly work. But you will fill the remote repo with metadata it may not use. If you have differing repository IDs you could corrupt the metadata. Maven may corrupt the metadata on its own as mentioned. There's little benefit other than the disk space saved. Given how fast Hudson would pull the artifacts from Archiva, you could regularly purge the local repository and not have to worry too much about that. I wouldn't recommend it :) - Brett -- Brett Porter [email protected] http://brettporter.wordpress.com/
