Mailing-List: contact ivy-user-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ivy-user@ant.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of Douglass.A.Glidden@boeing.com
 designates 130.76.32.69 as permitted sender)
From: "Glidden, Douglass A" <Douglass.A.Glidden@boeing.com>
To: "ivy-user@ant.apache.org" <ivy-user@ant.apache.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 09:49:00 -0500
Subject: RE: dynamic revision and determine the most recent
Thread-Topic: dynamic revision and determine the most recent
Thread-Index: AcpSWRtE9brbtjHrSL+147NiPBKFOwAAMGbQ
Message-ID: 
 <E75F905154E9F64CB9F3AE5AB51165B702772B398D@XCH-MW-11V.mw.nos.boeing.com>
References: <25992333.post@talk.nabble.com>
 	<E75F905154E9F64CB9F3AE5AB51165B702772B3920@XCH-MW-11V.mw.nos.boeing.com>
 <25993396.post@talk.nabble.com>
In-Reply-To: <25993396.post@talk.nabble.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0

I'm confused-doesn't a SNAPSHOT revision get converted to a timestamp on pu=
blish?  I have never used SNAPSHOT versioning, so perhaps my understanding =
is incorrect.

In this scenario, I think it's pretty likely that D1's version of Module B =
will fail to compile regardless of which version of Module A gets downloade=
d-it will not compile using the version from the local repository because D=
2's changes are missing, and most likely it will not compile using the vers=
ion from the shared repository because D1's changes are missing.  If it doe=
s happen to compile anyway (because D1 hasn't made any changes in Module B =
that rely on his own changes in Module A), that could be a significantly wo=
rse problem, because D1 may not realize that his changes from Module A have=
 not been incorporated.  The bottom line is, anytime two developers make si=
multaneous changes, one of them is going to have to merge the changes and r=
epublish at some point in time; it's just a matter of how soon it has to be=
 done.

However, as Niklas has correctly pointed out, you should be able (with a fe=
w caveats) to get what you're looking for by using the "latest-time" latest=
 strategy instead of the default latest strategy ("latest-revision").

(As an aside, my personal opinion is that if you have a developer sitting w=
ith uncommitted changes on his local machine for 20 days, your team has big=
ger things to worry about than not getting the right version of a snapshot;=
 that's just my opinion, though, and may or may not be relevant.)

Doug Glidden
Software Engineer
The Boeing Company
Douglass.A.Glidden@boeing.com

-----Original Message-----
From: corwin.yo [mailto:corwin.yo@infonie.fr]
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:16
To: ivy-user@ant.apache.org
Subject: RE: dynamic revision and determine the most recent


Thanks Douglass,

I understand how its working. But in this case, what is the best practice ?

If we imagine this case :
Module B depends of Module A (A->B)

2009-10-01 : the developper D1 commits and publishes to its local a modific=
ation on 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT version of module A.
2009-10-20 : a developper D2 commits another modification on 1.2.0-SNAPSHOT=
 of module A and a continue integration system publishes to a shared reposi=
tory. This modification occurs a new dependancy with module B.
2009-10-21 : developpeur D1 updates the Module B and  Ivy downloads the las=
test.integration Module A from the local. Thereforce Module B does not comp=
ile, because it is older.

Has to update Module A and publish the last changes in its local, Developpe=
r
D1 ?
or is there a better pratice ?


Glidden, Douglass A wrote:
>
> Ivy uses ONLY the revision numbers to compare versions across
> repositories-it does not use the "publication date" or any other
> metadata-it would be essentially meaningless, since there is no
> guarantee that any given server or your local computer has a correctly
> synchronized system clock.  If an artifact is found with the same
> revision in two different repositories, they are assumed to be the
> same and whatever repository is first in the chain will be used.  So
> in your case, Ivy finds that the most recent version in each
> repository is 1.1.7.1; since they are the same, it then proceeds to
> download from the first repository in the chain.  If two revisions are
> different they need to have different revision numbers.
>
> Incidentally, the returnFirst property (which is false by default) has
> no relation to this-setting returnFirst to true causes Ivy to get the
> artifact from the first repository in which it finds a satisfactory
> version without checking to see if there are more recent versions in
> other repositories.
>
> Doug Glidden
> Software Engineer
> The Boeing Company
> Douglass.A.Glidden@boeing.com
>
>

--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/dynamic-revision-and-de=
termine-the-most-recent-tp25992333p25993396.html
Sent from the ivy-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.