From ivy-user-return-6957-apmail-ant-ivy-user-archive=ant.apache.org@ant.apache.org Thu Jul 08 04:02:08 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-ant-ivy-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 62333 invoked from network); 8 Jul 2010 04:02:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 8 Jul 2010 04:02:08 -0000 Received: (qmail 77537 invoked by uid 500); 8 Jul 2010 04:02:08 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-ant-ivy-user-archive@ant.apache.org Received: (qmail 77484 invoked by uid 500); 8 Jul 2010 04:02:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ivy-user-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: ivy-user@ant.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list ivy-user@ant.apache.org Delivered-To: moderator for ivy-user@ant.apache.org Received: (qmail 15583 invoked by uid 99); 7 Jul 2010 22:31:05 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.6 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Dependency order issue with transitive dependencies Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 17:27:45 -0500 Message-ID: <62D9536C7F0A9947B04FBE6C077FC096034B5C7F@1hqwinexc01.elogex.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Dependency order issue with transitive dependencies Thread-Index: AcseI59ZzP3Q2w7HRsqJKOx8Gd1ftQ== From: "Hekmat, Payam" To: X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I have 3 modules in the following configuration ('->' indicates a dependency): Module A: v1.0 v1.1 Module B: v2.0 ->A v1.0 v2.1 ->A v1.0 Module C: v3.0 ->A v1.0 ->B v2.1=20 v3.1 ->A v1.1 ->B v2.1 (yes, C v3.1 is technically impossible to resolve) With an ivy file declaring the dependencies:=20 Using the 'latest-compatible' conflict manager, I'd expect it to resolve to A v1.0, B v2.0, C v3.0, but it only resolves to B v2.1, C v3.1. If I change the order of the dependency elements around (e.g. A,C,B or B,C,A), it resolves correctly. In the original order, it restarts the resolve process trying to handle incompatibilities between A v1.0 and A v1.1.=20 Any insights on where the issue could be? While this is a trivial example, it's not feasible for me to order the dependencies in practice. Thanks in advance, Payam Hekmat