2009/3/9 Tom Eyckmans <[email protected]>
> In case you have multiple repositories (mixed ivy/maven/...) configured
> that have for some part the same modules available but with different
> configurations dependending on the repo (like the problem of Neil Curzon) we
> could make the following possible:
>
> dependencies {
> mavenRepo { // only the mavenRepo resolver should be used for the
> dependencies declared here
> compile "org.mods:module-one:1.0"
my mistake offcourse I ment to use [group: 'org.mods', name: 'module-one',
version: '1.0']
>
>
> dependencies.each { dependency ->
> dependency.dependencyConfigurationMappings.mappings.clear()
> dependency.dependencyConfigurations('runtime')
> }
>
> }
> ivyRepo { // only the ivyRepo resolver should be used for the
> dependencies declared here
> compile "org.mods:module-two:1.0"
my mistake offcourse I ment to use [group: 'org.mods', name: 'module-two',
version: '1.0']
>
> }
>
> // the usual resolver logic applies
> compile "commons-lang:commons-lang:2.4"
my mistake offcourse I ment to use [group: 'commons-lang', name:
'commons-lang', version: '2.4']
>
> }
>
> I think would map to the modules/module tag of an ivysettings.xml file. Tho
> this could possibly cause some problems/conflicts when we allow the use of
> ivy.xml/ivysettings.xml files to specify dependencies in combination with
> dependencies defined in the build.gradle file.
>
> 2009/3/2 Hans Dockter <[email protected]>
>
> Hi,
>>
>> On Feb 26, 2009, at 2:33 PM, Hans Dockter wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>>
>>> we are working intensely on Gradle 0.6. One focus is to make our DSL more
>>> intuitive. To achieve this we are improving the syntax of the DSL as well as
>>> how the different elements play together.
>>>
>>> Here is a link to the current draft of the new DSL:
>>> http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GRADLE/Dependencies
>>>
>>> We are very interested in your feedback.
>>>
>>
>> Many thanks for all your feedback.
>>
>> There is now a second draft:
>> http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GRADLE/Dependencies
>>
>> There are still a couple of issues:
>>
>> 1.) Ivy uses (org, name, revision). Maven uses (group, name, version).
>> Gradle has its domain model, so it can use whatever is the most expressive.
>> In this case I like the Maven notation. So I propose that Gradle uses
>> (group, name, version) (as it does already in 0.5).
>>
>> 2.) In the 2nd draft there is only one repositories section. All
>> repositories declared in there will be used for resolving dependencies and
>> can be used for publishing. I think this corresponds to the most common use
>> case. If you don't want, that a repository is used for resolving
>> dependencies, this has to be declared explicitly.
>>
>> 3.) What about the Gradle 0.5 notation for declaring dependencies?
>>
>> compile "junit:junit:4.4" (vs. compile group: 'junit', name: 'junit',
>> version: '4.4')
>>
>> Should we remove it for 0.6?
>> Should we deprecate it but remove it in a later version?
>> Should we continue to support it as an alternative notation?
>>
>> 4.) A tiny issue: Should we say
>>
>> repositories {
>> mavenCentral
>> }
>>
>> or
>>
>> repositories {
>> mavenCentral()
>>
>> }
>>
>> - Hans
>>
>> --
>> Hans Dockter
>> Gradle Project lead
>> http://www.gradle.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>
>> http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>
>>
>>
>
