Resources Plugin
  1. Resources Plugin
  2. GPRESOURCES-61

Resource-specific excluded mappers are still applied to bundle that the resource becomes part of

    Details

    • Type: Bug Bug
    • Status: Open
    • Priority: Blocker Blocker
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Affects Version/s: 1.0
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      Its not quite clear what the right thing is here.

      Do we prevent bundling of items that have mappers excluded? Or do we bundle them but add the exclusion to the mappers excludes? Or do we create a new bundle for each set of excluded mappers?

        Activity

        Hide
        Peter N. Steinmetz added a comment -

        Reading the mapper documentation, it strikes me that if the user has specified an exclusion, then the mapper shouldn't be applied.

        From a programming perspective it seems like the first alternative here is perhaps the simplest, namely, if mappers are excluded then these resources are not bundled. This might be a good approach to start with.

        It is presently unclear if there is test coverage for this situation.

        Show
        Peter N. Steinmetz added a comment - Reading the mapper documentation, it strikes me that if the user has specified an exclusion, then the mapper shouldn't be applied. From a programming perspective it seems like the first alternative here is perhaps the simplest, namely, if mappers are excluded then these resources are not bundled. This might be a good approach to start with. It is presently unclear if there is test coverage for this situation.
        Hide
        Patrick Jungermann added a comment -

        Yes, I think your're right. There should be a separate bundle for all different mapper sets. In fact, only the mappers of later phases (RENAMING to NOTIFICATION) as well as other mappers of the same phase (AGGREGATION), which will be applied after it based on their priorities, are relevant for the creation of separate bundle files.

        Of course, a simple approach would be to exclude resources with excluded mappers from the bundling, but maybe only mappers of the previous phases shouldn't be applied to it (like COMPRESSION). This would not affect the bundling at all.

        Show
        Patrick Jungermann added a comment - Yes, I think your're right. There should be a separate bundle for all different mapper sets. In fact, only the mappers of later phases ( RENAMING to NOTIFICATION ) as well as other mappers of the same phase ( AGGREGATION ), which will be applied after it based on their priorities, are relevant for the creation of separate bundle files. Of course, a simple approach would be to exclude resources with excluded mappers from the bundling, but maybe only mappers of the previous phases shouldn't be applied to it (like COMPRESSION ). This would not affect the bundling at all.

          People

          • Assignee:
            Peter N. Steinmetz
            Reporter:
            Marc Palmer
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            2 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated: