ant-ivy-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Kirby Files" <Kirby.Fi...@masergy.com>
Subject RE: Use of "master" conf
Date Fri, 12 Jun 2009 09:49:11 GMT
For third-party modules, not everyone wants to pull in all of the
dependencies declared by a particular module. I personally don't want to
pull a whole pile of junk jars from Maven, just because some projects
list dozens of dependencies. For maven libs, I tend to just pull in the
artifacts from the project itself. IvyRoundup has higher quality
dependency lists, so there, I use transitive dependencies.

Thanks,
  --kirby

-----Original Message-----
From: Niklas Matthies [mailto:ml_ivy-user@nmhq.net] 
Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 5:30 PM
To: ivy-user@ant.apache.org
Subject: Re: Use of "master" conf

On Thu 2009-06-11 at 11:59h, Michael Kebe wrote on ivy-user:
> 
> When talking about module dependencies you have two view.
> 
> 1) The view from your module (What does it need?).
> 
> 2) The view to you module (Who needs it?).

Certainly.

> And the your "master" configuration can be used by other modules which
> depend on your module, but without your dependencies.

But for what purpose, without the dependencies?

Given a dependency A->B, I don't think that A should depend on whether
a particular artifact of that dependency is published by B or by some
dependency of B. For example, B should be able to factor out some part
of itself into a separate module and add a dependency to it, without
breaking A. It's effectively an implementation detail of B whether its
artifacts are published directly by B or rather by a dependency of B.
Those "master" configurations expose this implementation aspect, and I
wonder why this would be desirable.

-- Niklas Matthies

Mime
View raw message