I have exactly the same use case. The reason that the resolver chains always break down has to do with how Ivy's cache is implemented. The change suggested here https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-399, would allow this to be corrected. Once this is done, all you would need to do to use your versions is resolver against a resolver chain with your local repository at the head.
I have not found any simple work around with the current revision of ivy On 2/1/07, John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
One thing I've been hearing from my coworkers is that when they have a locally-published module, they always want to use the local version regardless of versions exist in other repositories. I've tried various strategies like setting the default resolver to stop after the first match and forcing local modules have high revision numbers, but there seems to be no reliable way to *just* use the local version of a module. The problem always seems to manifest itself like this: I'm working on a module A, which depends on module B, and module B depends on module C, but A does not depend directly on C. I have a local version of A (because I'm working on it), but I'm using shared versions of B and C. Now suppose I discover that a bug in C is causing A to break, so I make a bug fix and C and publish it. Now I want to see if my bug fix in C also fixed A, so I resolve in A and I get.....the old version of C! This happens because A only depends on C through B, so the resolver will only consider the version of C that B depends on. There are two workarounds to this situation--either make A depend directly on C, or publish a new version of B for the sole purpose of updating the version of C it depends on. Unfortunately when my coworkers get into this situation, they just want their code to work without having to untangle any weird Ivy voodoo. I have an idea for a fix but I don't know if it would work. What if there was a special file system repository (resolver? both?) type would always choose a version when one is available? So in my scenario, this new resolver would pick my fixed version of C even though it doesn't match the revision number that B wants. Would that even work? --jw
-- - Eric
