Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[cross-project-issues-dev] Are secondary update sites harmful?


While struggling with a build problem I discovered that my master feature has

<update label="%updateSiteName" url=""/> <discovery label="%updateSiteName" url=""/>

When I investigate, the Install New Software... dialog takes a very very long time to list the contents which comprises all releases of projects such as CDO, Modisco, OCL, UML2, Xtext and older releases of projects such as Acceleo, EMF Compare, EMFt. The repo seems to have many old but only some recent releases of EMF.

Given that all the good stuff is consistently in a SimRel repo, is something else huge and incomplete of any value at all? I suspect that this kind of secondary repo that predates the SimRel is a major cause of the very poor performance of P2 installation. My workspace has so many 'available sites' that I cannot be bothered to keep disabling them. Rather I do ZIP installs, with contact all update sites disabled. However is not one of them, so perhaps the master featrure update sites are just ignored.

What and where should projects specify their update sites?


        Ed Willink

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.

Back to the top