Some Eclipse Foundation services are deprecated, or will be soon. Please ensure you've read this important communication.

Bug 271078

Summary:	7 ... now 1 Galileo projects use "site.xml" in update site URL
Product:	Community	Reporter:	David Williams <david_williams>
Component:	Cross-Project	Assignee:	Scott Lewis <slewis>
Status:	RESOLVED FIXED	QA Contact:
Severity:	normal
Priority:	P3	CC:	alex.panchenko, b.muskalla, bluesoldier, ruediger.herrmann
Version:	unspecified
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	PC
OS:	Windows XP
Whiteboard:

Description David Williams

2009-04-03 00:00:59 EDT

dltk.build
dtp.build
ecf.build
epp-udc.build
rap.build
riena.build
stp.build

I'm wondering if this is just left over mistaken notion. 
You are generating P2 meta-data, right? That is an important Galileo requirement (see bug 252804) and most of you (not quite all) have reported "fixed" in that Galileo required bug. 

By using the "site.xml" explicitly in your update site URL, you are basically telling P2 you are an "old" update site, and it downloads all the jars, and creates the meta data under the covers ... v e r y  s l o w l y. (or something like that). 

If you are already creating meta-data, perhaps you just need to remove the "site.xml" from the URL in your .build file. 

If you are not creating meta-data ... that's a bigger problem, so please explain. 

thank you.

Comment 1 John Arthorne

2009-04-03 00:37:23 EDT

p2 does actually check for a content.jar first, so the site.xml shouldn't generally be a problem. However, we have seem cases where there is a timeout or other failure getting the content.jar, and then if that is missing it searches for a site.xml, with the bad consequence of generating metadata for the entire site from scratch. We found in the Eclipse project sites we could avoid these problems by removing the site.xml entirely before publishing the repository.

Comment 2 David Williams

2009-04-03 00:47:52 EDT

(In reply to comment #1)
> p2 does actually check for a content.jar first, ...

Ah, thanks John. I heard it was "bad to do" and misunderstood. so doesn't matter if in the URL or not ... but best not not to have a site.xml file at all. 

That'll be a little more complicated for me to check :) 
but appreciate the advice.

Comment 3 Xiaoying Gu

2009-04-03 02:40:17 EDT

the site.xml has been removed from dtp.build.

Comment 4 Alex Panchenko

2009-04-03 02:57:39 EDT

I have removed site.xml from dltk.build

Comment 5 John Arthorne

2009-04-03 10:36:02 EDT

No, I misunderstood you... I missed the "using the "site.xml" explicitly in your update site URL" part. If you are explicitly using site.xml in your repository URL, then the p2 repository at the same location will never be seen. If your URL just points to the directory, we will first search for content.jar, then content.xml, then site.xml. My advice would be to remove any particular file name suffix from your repository URL and let p2 determine which suffix to use.

Comment 6 Rüdiger Herrmann

2009-04-05 12:52:21 EDT

The site.xml has been removed from rap.build
(p2 meta-data is still missing from the RAP update site - but coming soon)

Comment 7 Rüdiger Herrmann

2009-05-06 04:46:45 EDT

(In reply to comment #6)
> The site.xml has been removed from rap.build
> (p2 meta-data is still missing from the RAP update site - but coming soon)
The RAP update site now contains p2 meta-data

Comment 8 David Williams

2009-05-08 01:24:40 EDT

ECF is only one still using a "site.xml" file directly in their URL, as of M7.

Comment 9 David Williams

2009-05-18 12:26:29 EDT

thanks scott.