[jira] [Commented] (JCRVLT-258) Default compression level incorrectly set to NO_COMPRESSION (0)

["Timothee Maret (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCRVLT-258?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16315905#comment-16315905 ] 

Timothee Maret commented on JCRVLT-258:
---------------------------------------

The default compression level was set on purpose to {{DEFAULT_COMPRESSION}} in JCRVLT-163 in order to keep the same expectations regarding the compression level as it was before JCRVLT-163.

I think it is important to set it back to {{DEFAULT_COMPRESSION}} because it is ... a good default choice which fits well with a "generic" feature such as the Package Manager. Optimising for space or speed is use case specific IMO.

One example of negative side effect of using {{NO_COMPRESSION}} by default, is the increase size of content packages shipped in AEM.

+1 for setting back the default compression level to {{DEFAULT_COMPRESSION}}.

> Default compression level incorrectly set to NO_COMPRESSION (0)
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: JCRVLT-258
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCRVLT-258
>             Project: Jackrabbit FileVault
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Packaging
>    Affects Versions: 3.1.40
>            Reporter: Konrad Windszus
>
> Default compression level has been changed in this commit from {{Deflater#DEFAULT_COMPRESSION}} (-1) to {{DEFLATER#NO_COMPRESSION}} (0): https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-filevault/commit/9515a785d4e6aa60503969023eadc0832f8c181b#diff-7c56322ea0d87bb499663bdee9c41967R40
> The original patch from JCRVLT-163 contained -1 (which was IMHO correct and is also more in line on how packages have been created prior to JCRVLT-163).



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)