No we shouldn't, as there's no fix to make... Their API is fine. The
other adapters just decide to do it differently. They just decide to do
a full publish every time and not make use of WTP's incremental
There's no fix to suggest to them. But a dialog may need to be opened.
But a dialog isn't the same as a solid "bug". I'll need to even think
how to approach the dialog because this wouldn't just be a server tools
bug. It kinda touches on about half of WTP.
It's something that I need to think about how to even bring up without
sounding manic and all over the map.
Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
so we should raise an issue with WTP on this for fix in wtp3 ?
> The generic adapter does very very weird things.
> I'm kinda [tired] ;) So I'll just say the following:
> The other adapters don't handle sub-modules. They handle everything at
> once always because they do not do incremental publishing. Because they
> rebuild the .ear or .war every time, they do a full publish every time.
> SO they handle it very very differently.
> I know that doesn't help very much.
> - RS
> Max Rydahl Andersen wrote:
>>> The worst part of all is that there's no way to tell whether a
>>> is binary or is a project. There's simply no API for it.
>> somehow the other adapters worked with it, correct?
>> How do they handle the binary module ?