On 06/06/2007, at 8:28 AM, Mark Hobson wrote:
On 04/06/07, Mark Hobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi there,
Is the ArtifactFilter passed into the ArtifactCollector.collect
methods meant to be applied before calls to the ResolutionListeners?
Currently it appears to disregard the filter whilst recursing and
then
apply it only when calculating
ArtifactResolutionResult.artifactResolutionNodes.
My recollection would be that some artifacts are filtered out but
their transitive dependencies still needed to be taken into
consideration for version calculations, so this could be the reason
for this.
I think it's probably better to approach this from the angle of the
problem you are trying to solve - is there a reason you think it
should behave differently to how it does at present?
Whilst everyone's busily replying to this, here's another
ResolutionListener question: are the omitForNearer and omitForCycle
methods intended to be invoked instead of, or after, the
includeArtifact method?
the answer is "yes" :)
they should be invoked instead of it for the current node if it
should be omitted. But by the same token, the artifact may have been
previously included and are later omitted.
For a given node, it's "instead of".
Just a quick check - are you working on fixing up issues in 2.0.x or
making other improvements and features like the conflict resolution?
Given the "Artifact changes" thread, it appears there are a few
people working on, or interested in working on, that area of the code
but that we haven't really found a unified direction yet.
- Brett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
