ant-ivy-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tom Widmer <tom.wid...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: ivy:resolve appears to ignore 'type'
Date Fri, 13 Mar 2009 12:49:50 GMT
Alan Chaney wrote:
> I have a setup with a chain repository which has a repository for jar 
> files used to build a set of war files (using a number of different 
> permutations). I publish the jar files into one element of the chain and 
> the war files into another. The war files are then made available via a 
> company-wide repository.
> 
> It so happens that one of the war files has the same name as a jar file. 

You mean that org and module are the modules having completely different 
artifacts? That doesn't seem like a good idea. You're meant to have 
different module names for different ivy files (obviously ivy files 
change over time (revision) and potentially branch, but they are still 
the same logical module with the same artifacts).

> As part of the build process for a JAR I resolve that jar in-line to get 
> the most recent build number. However, for some reason, the resolver 
> insists on returning the WAR file build number which happens to be 
> wildly different from the jar file and not what I want at all.
> 
> I tried to set the type="jar" in the retrieve (as below) but it makes no 
> difference. So then I looked a bit more closely and determined that 
> maybe I should try a static resolve mode with a limit on the version 
> number. But that doesn't work either! The resolve fails, and, sure 
> enough, the next thing that happens is that the buildnumber task uses 
> 'latest.integration'.

"2.0-" doesn't match the documentation for version < 2.0 (is that what 
you were trying?). I think you need:
"(,2.0["
(see 
http://ant.apache.org/ivy/history/latest-release/ivyfile/dependency.html)

> Is there a way of getting the buildnumber task to only consider 
> particular artifacts?

All artifacts for a ivy file have the same revision number anyway, so 
I'm not sure that would help.

  Of course, another way (apart from renaming the
> jar which would not be very convenient) is to create a different 
> settings file which specifically points to the jar resolver, I suppose.

Why not rename the module rather than the jar? As far as I can tell, the 
jar and the war are not part of the same module, so why give them the 
same module name? The artifact names need not change in order to change 
the module names.

I hope this helps - I may have missed the issue.

Tom


Mime
View raw message