Skip to content

Suggest excluding cache folder #149

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 28, 2018
Merged

Suggest excluding cache folder #149

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 28, 2018

Conversation

kichik
Copy link
Contributor

@kichik kichik commented Feb 28, 2018

No description provided.

@dschep
Copy link
Contributor

dschep commented Feb 28, 2018

Any reason to suggest it instead of simply making it so? Meaning, have the plugin add that to the excludes, like how it used to add all the deps to the includes(before your changes in #147 of course)

@kichik
Copy link
Contributor Author

kichik commented Feb 28, 2018

That would require parsing pipCmdExtraArgs. It's possible, but I think if we're going that route a simpler pipCache: true option would be even better. We should even turn it on by default.

@dschep
Copy link
Contributor

dschep commented Feb 28, 2018

I like that idea. If we can have caching by default, that's optimal IMO. I'd prefer it to go in .serverless/pip-cache just to keep cruft contained. And infact, that would remove the need for omitting it from packaging, since .serverless is never packaged.

@kichik
Copy link
Contributor Author

kichik commented Feb 28, 2018

The problem with .serverless is that it often gets wiped. Also, we should probably limit this only to Docker builds. Otherwise we risk ignoring the pre-existing system cache.

In the future we can also figure out a good way to automatically mount the system cache, if it exists.

@dschep
Copy link
Contributor

dschep commented Feb 28, 2018

Good point. Merging this for now then 👍

@dschep dschep merged commit ed73c08 into serverless:master Feb 28, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants