Thanks for replying! I think I understand this better now. In my build logs, I have
[INFO] [deploy:deploy] [INFO] Retrieving previous build number from artifacts Uploading: /path/to/shared/repo/project/mymodule/1.0-SNAPSHOT/mymodule-1.0-20060802.093051-13.jar 71K uploaded So, it looks like Maven looks at the shared repository, and figures out a version qualifier & build number. The qualifier is the timestamp and build number is figured out by incrementing the last build number. In my case, I guess, since I started from a clean repository and no build has failed yet, the build number corresponds to Continuum build number (which mislead me into thinking that Continuum decides the build number). I will try the Maven user list. Thanks, Binil On 8/2/06, Jesse McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
ah I see where your going, have you tried the maven users list? that is very much something that would be configured directly in maven, if it can be done like you are shooting for, which I am not to confident would be supported without adding some custom artifact resolvers. cheers! On 8/2/06, Binil Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Jesse, > > Thanks for the reply. > > I am using SNAPSHOT dependencies between modules. Continuum does generate > the SNAPSHOT binaries with a timestamp, and Maven 2 lets developers depend > on the latest SNAPSHOT automatically. All that functionality you mention > works fine for me. > > Since the SCM I am using - SVN - does version the repository by revision > numbers, I am interested in making the artifact's name also to contain it. > > Right now, Continuum generates artifacts named like, say, > artifact-1.0-20060801.123409-10.jar. Here, the number 10, I think, is the > build number. Instead of this, I was hoping that I can get the revision > number from SVN. This way, looking at the artifact name I can know precisely > where it came from. SVN does a great job of ensuring atomic commits and > maintaining revision numbers for the whole repository; it would be a shame > not to make use of that. > > To summarize, I am fine with the way SNAPSHOT builds work in general. All I > am looking for is a way to make use of the SVN revision number within the > SNAPSHOT version number. Note that for non-SNAPSHOT binaries, I *want* > version numbers exactly as mentioned in the POM. :-) > > Thanks, > Binil > > On 8/1/06, Jesse McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I don't really know of a simple way to do that, there are a couple of > > factors at play here.. > > > > the <version> tag in the pom.xml is what governs the version that is > > appended to the artifact for storage in the repository, and that > > version doesn't change with scm version numbers anyway that I know of > > (of course I could be wrong, there might be a way). > > > > If you need functionality that can map a version in a repository to a > > particular snapshot in time of the scm then I would recommend using > > the SNAPSHOTs setup. In these the version of your pom would be > > something like 1.0-SNAPSHOT and then whenever continuum deployed the > > snapshot it would replace that version with a timestamp. That > > timestamp could be turn be converted into a date that could you pass > > into subversion and get the checkout of source corresponding to that > > point in time. > > > > that is nice also in that developers using your continuum published > > repository don't have to do anything to get the latest releases of > > code into thier development environment, maven will download the > > latest snapshot for them. > > > > anyway, good luck! > > > > On 8/1/06, Binil Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I am using Continuum 1.0.3, Maven 2.0.4 & SVN . I have configured > > Continuum > > > to publish the artifacts it build into a shared repository, as described > > in > > > the 'Better Builds With Maven' book. I would like the revision number of > > the > > > SVN repository to be part of the version number of artifacts generated > > by > > > Continuum. Is there a simple way to achieve this? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Binil > > > > > > PS: I am unsure if this question had been asked here before; I tried > > > searching the list archives and could not find the answer. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > jesse mcconnell > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -- jesse mcconnell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
