Hi Doug,
as we always tell, you _may_ deploy "behind the back" to nexus storage
(like you described above, adding files using FS to nexus repo
storage), but is highly non-recommended.
Now, nexus will serve it up, but you have few caveats:
if the file gets into NFC (is requested before is deployed), nexus
will start to "refuse" it's serving. And with FS deployments, it will
be "unaware" of the fact that the file appeared, so you will need to
be careful with this.
You could have different tricks here, like using very short NFC TTL
(Not Found Cache TTL) and such.
Again, this might work, but could be unreliable and is not the recommended way?
Why do you dislike the http:// deployment? It is much-much snappier
that scm:// btw, is it only because of CI turnaround time?
~t~
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 6:07 PM, Doug Douglass<
douglass.doug@...> wrote:
> We're transitioning from proximity (yes, very old!) to nexus. We've been
> running them both in parallel for several weeks now, so far so good.
> Nexus, proximity and our CI server (CruiseControl) all run on the same host
> and as the same user.
> We use a "ci-build" profile to override the scp:// deploymentUrl in our root
> pom and use local file:// URLs instead. This cut our CI build times in half.
> Now, as we transition to nexus, we will replace scp:// with
>
https:// deploymentUrl in our root pom, but what of the CI server?
>
> Is it a good idea to use file:// deploymentUrl to deploy into nexus?
> FYI, the CI artifacts are exclusively SNAPSHOT versions and we have
> unqiueVersion to false.
> TIA,
> Doug
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
nexus-user-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail:
nexus-user-help@...
