buildr-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <>
Subject Re: dependencies for Buildr modules
Date Fri, 16 Jan 2015 21:13:27 GMT

On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 12:13 AM, Dieter Vrancken <> wrote:

> The same pattern is replicated in a other modules as well. It seems
> rather cumbersome to have to hunt down all the appropriate dependencies
> and their specific version numbers. Also, in the example above, it is
> not really possible to make the checkstyle version a build parameter
> because its dependencies might change across versions.

It is somewhat problematic. There are some modules that do support changing
the version but they tend to hard code the versions of the dependencies for
each version of the module.

> Listing the dependency transitively would solve both my concerns, so I
> tried doing the following and it seems to work just fine:
>     def dependencies
>       Buildr::transitive ''
>     end
> Is there are a reason this is not done?

The main reason is that it is not stable and repeatable. Depending on how
the pom's are authored, that could result in different set's of
dependencies being included. i.e. If the Pom for lists version ranges, and  a new
version of a dependency is released that fit's in the dependency range,
then the set of dependencies will change.

This means coming back to a project 2 years after it was last touched can
actually result in the project not working or not compiling.  Rather than
have that, listing out all the dependencies means it will still work into
the future.

FWIW I often do something  like


To collect the set of dependencies needed.


Peter Donald

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message