gump-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Gumpy and <option>
Date Tue, 03 Feb 2004 15:02:08 GMT
On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Adam Jack <ajack@trysybase.com> wrote:

> Any pointers on the correct behavior for determining the need for
> such dynamic dependencies?

Not sure about "correct", sorry.  In "traditional" Gump things roughly
work as follows:

(1) all <depend> and <option> elements outside of <ant> are collected
    in the dependsOn map keyed by the project attribute.

(2) all <depend> elements nested into <ant> get turned into <property
    jarpath="..."/>.

(3) <property project="..."> adds a <depend> element to dependsOn if
    it doesn't refer to the project itself, is not of type srcdir and
    the project name is not already a key in the dependsOn map.

So from this, //project/option wins over //project/ant/depend.

> BTW: I think I need some 'optimization/trimming' algorithm for
> dependencies (right now any 'difference' in a dependency, and subtle
> difference = runtime or not, allows Gumpy to keep two, not one.)

We should look at the differences and create some rules to unify them.
For example, if we have runtime="true" on one element and no runtime
attribute on the other, we can probably assume that "true" is the
correct value.  Things get a lot more complicated with inherited
dependencies, though.

Stefan

Mime
View raw message