On Dec 25, 2008, at 6:08 PM, Oleg Gusakov wrote:
Ralph,
If we start walking this road - let's generalize starting from
existing model, so that it could still be a subset of the the
solution.
I'm fine with that.
more complex (or simple :) spec is:
<dependency>
<scope>qa</scope>
<!-- we can use "version range" syntax because asm was declared in
"version" domain -->
<asm>[2.0,3.0)</asm>
<!-- this one specifies a list of possible values, including
negation: !win -->
<platform>[!win,linux]</platform>
</dependency>
Because it's a superset of the current model, we can easily provide
backward compatibility, as well as introduce all the new features
discussed here.
Resolution on this model is no different from what Mercury is doing
now, so implementing it should be straightforward. I need to explore
the negation option more though ..
I understand what you are suggesting, although the example above
doesn't seem to match since the asm and platform tags are used outside
the scope. In any case, what you are discussing here is right on the
money with what I am looking for. Hopefully, before you (or anyone
else) start implementing it - which I understand is still a ways off -
I would like to see a proposal put forth of what the pom syntax could
be so we can all understand what the end result is we are going for.
Ralph
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
