We also have to be careful of the problems introduced in 2.1.0 because
of transforming the pom...gpg can't sign etc.

2009/7/29 Ralph Goers <[email protected]>:
> Well, darn.  I finally read the proposal.  From what I can tell this is 
> largely what I implemented in 
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/components/branches/maven-2.1.x-MNG-624/.
>   However I was never able to finish that because I ran into one small little 
> problem.
>
> The proposal says the "resolved" pom will be written to 
> ${project.build.directory}/pom-transformed.xml. That is correct. However, 
> when resolving a child it will want to look at this pom since the version of 
> the parent will be in it but may not be in the "unresolved" pom.xml.  Here is 
> the problem. When resolving the child pom the value of 
> ${project.build.directory} isn't known. If the variable is defined in the 
> root pom for the project all the parent poms have to be traversed until the 
> definition is found or the superpom is encountered.  I really didn't want to 
> do that but couldn't think of any clever way around the problem.  Other than 
> that the code on that branch does everything that is being suggested. 
> However, it is no severely out of date.
>
> I did not implement the delayed handling of artifacts without versions, 
> primarily because I am led to believe that 3.0 will do a much better job of 
> this by using graphs.
>
> Ralph
>
>
> On Jul 29, 2009, at 4:33 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
>
>> I think I skimmed over the modules bit. As my comment suggested, I only 
>> thought it was to replace them where they matched.
>>
>> ie:
>>
>> <dependency>
>>  <groupId>${project.groupId}</groupId>
>>  <artifactId>other-artifactId</artifactId>
>>  <version>${project.version}</version>
>> </dependency>
>>
>> would become:
>>
>> <dependency>
>>  <artifactId>other-artifactId</artifactId>
>> </dependency>
>>
>> Which I think we've seen suggested before.
>>
>> Anything more than that is probably not going to be as feasible and prone to 
>> confusion.
>>
>> On 29/07/2009, at 7:27 PM, Brian Fox wrote:
>>
>>> First question, wouldn't ${project.version} solve the use case of
>>> updating same versioned dependencies?
>>>
>>> Also: "A <version> that was omitted in a <dependency> section can only
>>> be resolved if the referenced modules are resolved. So if it is NOT
>>> part of the sub-tree where the build was invoked we have a problem to
>>> solve. However this can be done by adding a list of projects named
>>> "closure" similar to the reactor but that is build from the
>>> toplevel-pom recursively following the <modules>."
>>>
>>> This doesn't work unless you have a whole project checked out on disk.
>>> You couldn't resolve from a repository because the module entry refers
>>> to a subfolder of where  to pom is, but in a repository it's
>>> meaningless...ie it has no complete coordinates.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Joerg Hohwiller<[email protected]> 
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>
>>>> Hi Brett,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for taking care. I already thought that this will gonna be ignored.
>>>>
>>>>> So the summary is that if omitted on a dependency, the group ID and
>>>>> version should match that of the current project, and on deployment it
>>>>> needs to be populated?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, correctly - at least the version is the important one
>>>> for omitting, I have no need for omitting groupId.
>>>> DependencyManagement should still overrule for compatibility
>>>> reasons.
>>>> If it is all just that easy as you point it out ;)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Jörg
>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>>>> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>>>>
>>>> iEYEARECAAYFAkpwwx0ACgkQmPuec2Dcv/8khQCdEMSSc/JrXVNfwMTGbEfOASHe
>>>> Mx8An3DskYpBA7xhLbzMA3Ohz7NvTipN
>>>> =H6YW
>>>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to