Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 90D9F75D2 for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2011 16:26:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 82272 invoked by uid 500); 1 Aug 2011 16:26:31 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-commons-dev-archive@commons.apache.org Received: (qmail 82180 invoked by uid 500); 1 Aug 2011 16:26:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@commons.apache.org Received: (qmail 82164 invoked by uid 99); 1 Aug 2011 16:26:30 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 16:26:30 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [212.27.42.6] (HELO smtp6-g21.free.fr) (212.27.42.6) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 01 Aug 2011 16:26:21 +0000 Received: from [192.168.0.10] (unknown [82.247.19.29]) by smtp6-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCE1482245 for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2011 18:25:56 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4E36D393.6000500@apache.org> Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2011 18:25:55 +0200 From: Emmanuel Bourg User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; fr; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Commons Developers List Subject: Re: Nightly snapshots References: <4E366FB1.6080702@apache.org> <4E36BED8.9080906@gmail.com> <4E36CA05.4090300@apache.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Le 01/08/2011 17:57, Ralph Goers a �crit : > These will just be new SNAPSHOTs so deploying a new one every evening regardless of whether it has changed should be no big deal. SNAPSHOTs without a timestamp overwrite a previous one while timestamped SNAPSHOTs should be cleaned up automatically by Nexus. What's the preferred strategy? Timestamped snapshots or not? Emmanuel Bourg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org