the algorithm to get a fresh copy for each DB access should be independent of the cached DB algorithm?
so when the oper thinks they are getting a fresh copy when in fact they're getting the copy from cache would not be good? is there a architecture document available which reflects the 2 testcases? is there ever a testcase scenario available where the 2 algorithm's coincide? Martin ______________________________________________ Disclaimer and confidentiality note Everything in this e-mail and any attachments relates to the official business of Sender. This transmission is of a confidential nature and Sender does not endorse distribution to any party other than intended recipient. Sender does not necessarily endorse content contained within this transmission. > Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 09:06:49 -0700 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Help with assembly (?) plugin > > > All, > > Can someone first of all either confirm that I am on the right track or tell > me that I am an idiot and point me in the right direction. > > If I *am* on the right track, can someone give me a shove towards the right > configuration. > > I have a module that is part of a larger project. It is required by two > other modules, but each requires a subtly different configuration. I would > like to minimise (eliminate) any code duplication and have each dependency > get built automagically. At present my developers are working around it by > manually toggling the configuration file and the artifact name but I know > there has to be a better way to do it. > > Basically, we have a load of data access code that hits a datasource. I need > to build two versions of this artifact, one which is configured to cache the > hits from the datasource and the other which is to hit the datasource each > time. This is configured in a file embedded within the jar by the build. > > I figure that I should be able to make one module with all the code and the > default (cache) setup in it. I think that I can then configure the no-cache > module to depend on the cache version and then use the assembly plugin to > unpack the jar into the build directory then have the no-cache configuration > file stomp on the cache version and have the jar be all packaged back up > again. > > Am I right in my line of thinking? > > Thanks in advance for any help. > > > Later, > > Andy Law > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Help-with-assembly-%28-%29-plugin-tp19861584p19861584.html > Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _________________________________________________________________ Get more out of the Web. Learn 10 hidden secrets of Windows Live. http://windowslive.com/connect/post/jamiethomson.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!550F681DAD532637!5295.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_domore_092008
