More efficient handling of API and Impl in Rebuilds » History » Version 2
Henning Blohm, 17.02.2020 19:11
1 | 1 | Henning Blohm | h1. More efficient handling of API and Impl in Rebuilds |
---|---|---|---|
2 | 2 | Henning Blohm | |
3 | Currently, in the dependency map used by the ComponentsBuilder, we analyze the necessity of a rebuild by comparing |
||
4 | build timestamps maintained in a dependency map in dependent components with a latest built timestamp kept in the |
||
5 | build lock file of the dependency component. |
||
6 | |||
7 | If there is a rebuild of an implementation part of a Java component, the build timestamp is updated and so a |
||
8 | rebuild of all dependency components forced - which is unnecessary, unless there was a change in the API as well. |
||
9 | |||
10 | We would like that a rebuild of dependency Java components is not forced, if there is no change of the API of a dependency component |
||
11 | |||
12 | h2. With the current model |
||
13 | |||
14 | At the level of the dependency component: |
||
15 | |||
16 | * Separate build timestamps for API and implementation as maintained in the build lock file. |
||
17 | |||
18 | At the level of the dependent component: |
||
19 | |||
20 | * When checking for rebuild in dependency components only check for matches with the API build timestamp. |
||
21 | |||
22 | However: How to detect, that a rebuilt due to code changes is NOT necessary, when the sync indicated a new revision? |
||
23 | |||
24 | h2. A new component split |
||
25 | |||
26 | The solution would be altogether completely natural, if api and impl as well as test would be different "Java" components. |
||
27 | |||
28 | We could have a simple layout: |
||
29 | |||
30 | <pre> |
||
31 | <module>/api |
||
32 | <module>/impl |
||
33 | </pre> |
||
34 | |||
35 | For compatibility, we could consider |
||
36 | |||
37 | <pre> |
||
38 | <module>/impl -(private)-> <module>/java/impl |
||
39 | <module>/java -(public)-> <module>/java/api |
||
40 | </pre> |