Bump. This isn't something anyone else has had to deal with? Or am I missing something completely obvious? Is the answer as simple as "don't ever use dynamic revisions?" If so, then what good are they?
If this isn't currently possible, would an enhancement request be worthwhile? I envision allowing a dependency along the lines of <dependency org="com.example" name="foo" rev="[1.0,1.1[" status="milestone" /> to mean a revision in the specified range with a status of milestone or greater. This would also allow for something like <dependency org="com.example" name="foo" rev="latest" status="milestone" /> as a synonym for the current "latest.*status*" mechanism. Thoughts? Please? Rich On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Steele, Richard <[email protected]> wrote: > Is it possible for me to declare a dependency using a dynamic revision > while restricting the status of the retrieved artifact? For example, I want > to define a version range, something like "[1.0,1.1[", but I don't want > artifacts with a status of integration, only milestone or release. So I > want version 1.0.5 if it has a status of "release" even if there's a version > 1.0.6 with a status of "integration." > > I know about latest.*status*, but that's not really what I want: I need to > define an upper and lower limit on the revision. > > Thanks, > Rich >
