I believe both Maven and SBT handle transitive dependencies similarly? My own build.sbt for schema projects has 4 dependencies, all of which are test-only dependencies:
scalaVersion := "2.12.17" libraryDependencies ++= Seq( "com.github.sbt" % "junit-interface" % "0.13.3" % "test", "junit" % "junit" % "4.13.2" % "test", "org.apache.daffodil" %% "daffodil-tdml-processor" % "3.4.0 " % "test", "org.apache.logging.log4j" % "log4j-core" % "2.19.0" % "test", ) We can't just move these test-only dependencies to daffodil-schema-sbt-test without changing their scope, because Maven and probably SBT too won't create transitive dependencies on another module's test dependencies. We would have to replace these "test" scopes with "compile" scopes to turn them into transitive dependencies which we could bring in just by using one line: libraryDependencies := Seq( "org.apache.daffodil" %% "daffodil-schema-sbt-test" % "3.4.0" % "test" ) I'm not sure how many other lines we can move from your build.sbt to daffodil-schema-sbt-test too? It would be ideal if we could somehow make all these lines in a build.sbt for schema projects unnecessary: scalaVersion := "2.12.17" testOptions += Tests.Argument(TestFrameworks.JUnit, "-v") crossPaths := false // Use flat folder structure. This means *.java and *.scala files are in the // same directory as resources files, and source/resource files are only // differentiated by their file extension. Compile / unmanagedSourceDirectories := Seq(baseDirectory.value / "src") Compile / unmanagedResourceDirectories := Seq(baseDirectory.value / "src") Compile / unmanagedSources / includeFilter := "*.java" | "*.scala" Compile / unmanagedResources / excludeFilter := "*.java" | "*.scala" Test / unmanagedSourceDirectories := Seq(baseDirectory.value / "test") Test / unmanagedResourceDirectories := Seq(baseDirectory.value / "test") Test / unmanagedSources / includeFilter := "*.java" | "*.scala" Test / unmanagedResources / excludeFilter := "*.java" | "*.scala" We might need to use a SBT plugin rather than a SBT module to achieve such an effect. John -----Original Message----- From: Mike Beckerle <mbecke...@apache.org> Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2022 9:48 AM To: dev@daffodil.apache.org Subject: EXT: new daffodil module to reduce regression testing difficulties ? I never got any feedback on this idea. Thoughts? Observations? On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 11:17 AM Mike Beckerle <mbecke...@apache.org> wrote: > I am having trouble regression testing schemas in bulk against the > 3.4.0-RC1. > > The challenge is that there are 70+ such schemas. All of them have > build.sbt which require updating, not just for the daffodil version > 3.4.0 dependency, but for other dependencies that are no longer up to > date. > > I have a suggestion. > > In order to make it easy to test DFDL schemas against daffodil, and to > make the conflicting dependencies maintenance issue as simple as > possible, that we create a daffodil module named > daffodil-schema-sbt-test. > > This module exists soley so that we have one single daffodil module > that a DFDL schema project can depend on, which drags in the > dependencies needed for testing a schema in the usual convenient sbt > manner. > > The build.sbt for a DFDL schema would (usually) contain a single > dependency. For example suppose our new module is named > daffodil-schema-sbt-test. > > name := "dfdl-jpeg" > > organization := "com.mitre" > > version := "0.0.1" > > libraryDependencies := Seq( > "org.apache.daffodil" %% "daffodil-schema-sbt-test" % "3.4.0" % "test" > ) > > That module's transitive dependencies would drag in, as dependencies, > scala and the scala library (I hope), as well as daffodil-tdml-lib, > junit-interface, junit, scala-xml, and any other modules that a schema > project might typically want to use but which are also possibly > conflicting dependencies in daffodil. > > This way the DFDL schema would inherit the specific versions for those > dependencies from Daffodil, instead of stating them explicitly itself > which creates a maintenance problem. > > Now, I'm not at all sure how to achieve this in sbt. But the build.sbt > for a DFDL schema really needs to be something that does NOT have a > bunch of modules/versions in it that require updating for each > daffodil release. > > Thoughts? >
