Yeah, I think I am just reading it oddly. When you say "The ivy file defining the dependency" you are meaning the ivy file where the relationship to the dependency is defined whereas I was reading it as the ivy file defining the artifact of the dependency (i.e. the other ivy.xml file).
I think that is where my disconnect was. I am probably just being a dumb ass, it happens on occasion. Archie Cobbs-3 wrote: > > On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 4:01 PM, mjparme <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The reason the current verbiage of "master configuration (i.e. the >> configuration of the module defining the dependency)" is confusing >> because >> it reads like it is talking about the ivy file that defines the >> dependency. >> Whereas the first sentence defines master configuration as the ivy file >> of >> the current module. >> > > Seems like there's still confusion about what the docs intended to mean... > > The ivy file defining the dependency *is* the ivy file of the current > module. Here the word "dependency" is referring to a relationship between > two modules. So there are three things being defined here: two modules and > a > dependency. > > The dependency is defined inside the "master" module's ivy.xml file. The > module being depended on is of course defined by it's ivy.xml file (i.e., > the other ivy.xml file). So modules "know" what they depend on, but > modules > don't "know" who depends on them. > > -Archie > > -- > Archie L. Cobbs > > -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/conf-mapping-documentation-contradicts-itself-tp28450261p28453344.html Sent from the ivy-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
