ant-ivy-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Eric Crahen" <eric.crahen.li...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Opt out of the cache for a resolver
Date Sun, 24 Dec 2006 16:37:35 GMT
Yes, what I am trying to do here is override! I am talking about
making changes local to my workspace. No one can see the override
resolver except me. Each developers override resolver would use a
private piece of their file system.

What you just described is a way to do this using versions.
I make changes to package-1.1 and Bob makes changes to package-1.1
and 10 other people do the same. We can all make up a new version.

There is the official shared/approved version 1.1, and the private version
1.1.X that we all created independently.

You can restate this as

Independent private shadows/overrides of version 1.1
and the official shared/approved version 1.1

Do you agree that this is the same thing, and the only difference really
is that your approach is to use versioning names and I am exploring a
different
approach?

--

Please, can you walk me through the scenario I described to John a few posts
back (where I describe A-> B -> C -> D-> X-> Y)?

I would like you demonstrate how that scenario would work by renaming and
reversioning things.



On 12/24/06, Stephane Bailliez <sbailliez@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Eric Crahen wrote:
> > When I use the copy in my override repository its the patched version.
> > When I remove the copy in my override repository it is the released
> > version.
> >
> > This is the point of a local override repository.
> > There are plenty of valid reasons for this:
> [...]
>
> Your vision seems to be restricted to 'overriding' without thinking to
> 'versioning'. Which ultimately leads to version 'shadowing'.
> A version is a version and must be uniquely identifiable. period. no jar
> flying around which is 1.1 which is not a 1.1.
>
> As John mentioned. Change the name. Change the version number. (no
> excuses that you cannot predict and that you are thinking that the next
> version of 1.1 may be postfixed by the name of your company or your dog
> name - this is _unlikely_). Change the resolver statuses. Whatever makes
> sense in term of version.
>
> Patch your version 1.1 and call it 1.1-patched-by-my-company and make
> sure that your resolver is actually able to make the distinction between
> 'patched-by-my-company' > 'final' or if you don't want to go that road,
> make sure to force the version to '1.1-patched-by-my-company]'.
> Whatever. Makes this humanly identifiable.
>
> -- stephane
>
>


-- 

- Eric

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message