ant-ivy-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steve Loughran <>
Subject Re: publishing to the big maven2 repository
Date Tue, 06 Mar 2007 11:44:01 GMT
Xavier Hanin wrote:
> On 3/5/07, Matt Benson <> wrote:

> Yes, I agree this is a nice thing, but it's not easy to convert an Ivy 
> fille
> to a pom. What do you do with configurations and their mapping. Everything
> will be lost in the pom. Maybe a first solution would be to consider 
> that if
> the Ivy file has configurations with the same names as m2 scopes then you
> consider dependencies in these confs to be in the corresponding scope, and
> for the rest put them as optional dependencies. In this case it's pretty
> easy and could be part of Ivy as a member of the "maven 2 compatibility"
> feature.

I think maybe we'd want to let people explicitly declare what the 
non-optional and optional ivy confs were for every m2 configuration:

<ivy:makepom file="build/m2.pom">
    <m2conf name="compile" conf="build,java5" />
    <m2conf name="optional" conf="java6,java4-scripting" />

We'd need to collaborate with the maven people here. One funny is that 
maven has a different eviction policy from Ivy (closest declaration to 
the root of the graph wins; conflict at the same depth is an error). We 
may want to avoid transitive dependency mismatch by explicitly listing 
the complete resolved graph in the POM, as resolved by Ivy rather than 
Maven. That way, recipients get what we declared, with the right to 
override it by declaring stuff closer, in their own POMs. Maybe that 
would be a switch

<ivy:makepom file="build/m2.pom" resolve="true">
    <m2conf name="compile" conf="build,java5" />
    <m2conf name="optional" conf="java6,java4-scripting" />

View raw message