You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@buildr.apache.org by Khristian <de...@gmail.com> on 2012/01/11 20:37:50 UTC
buildr and odd versions
I'm building a project with buildr that depends indirectly on the
stax-ex library. The problem is, some dependency seems to be looking
for the RELEASE version of this library.
It fails with:
(...)
Downloading org.jvnet.staxex:stax-ex:pom:RELEASE
Buildr aborted!
RuntimeError : Failed to download org.jvnet.staxex:stax-ex:pom:RELEASE,(...)
I've noticed that the metadata file for stax-ex has an entry for the
RELEASE version:
(...)
<versioning>
<latest>1.6</latest>
<release>1.6</release>
(...)
This seems to be related to a recent e-mail sent to the list (though
it only mentions the maven keyword LATEST).
Any ideas?
Thanks,
--
Khristian Alexander Schönrock
Re: buildr and odd versions
Posted by Khristian <de...@gmail.com>.
Thanks, that did the trick!
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Alex Boisvert <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Khristian,
>
> Our Maven / pom support does not cover these symbolic release names yet.
> At this point, you'd have to resolve this dependency manually or create an
> alias, e.g.,
>
> STAX_EX = "org.jvnet.staxex:stax-ex:jar:1.6"
> STAX_EX_RELEASE = "org.jvnet.staxex:stax-ex:jar:RELEASE"
>
> # add dependency (for download purposes)
> artifact(STAX_EX_RELEASE).enhance([artifact(STAX_EX)])
>
> # create alias
> artifact(STAX_EX_RELEASE).from(repositories.locate(STAX_EX))
>
> The on-going integration with Aether should get us better Maven/pom
> support... if this is a blocker for you, it could also be implemented in
> buildr with our custom pom support. Either way, feel free to file an
> enhancement request or hack something together and submit a patch.
>
> alex
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Khristian <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm building a project with buildr that depends indirectly on the
>> stax-ex library. The problem is, some dependency seems to be looking
>> for the RELEASE version of this library.
>>
>> It fails with:
>>
>> (...)
>> Downloading org.jvnet.staxex:stax-ex:pom:RELEASE
>> Buildr aborted!
>> RuntimeError : Failed to download
>> org.jvnet.staxex:stax-ex:pom:RELEASE,(...)
>>
>> I've noticed that the metadata file for stax-ex has an entry for the
>> RELEASE version:
>> (...)
>> <versioning>
>> <latest>1.6</latest>
>> <release>1.6</release>
>> (...)
>>
>> This seems to be related to a recent e-mail sent to the list (though
>> it only mentions the maven keyword LATEST).
>>
>> Any ideas?
>> Thanks,
>>
>> --
>> Khristian Alexander Schönrock
>>
--
Khristian Alexander Schönrock
http://derkosak.blogspot.com - Meu blógue!
Re: buildr and odd versions
Posted by Alex Boisvert <al...@gmail.com>.
Hi Khristian,
Our Maven / pom support does not cover these symbolic release names yet.
At this point, you'd have to resolve this dependency manually or create an
alias, e.g.,
STAX_EX = "org.jvnet.staxex:stax-ex:jar:1.6"
STAX_EX_RELEASE = "org.jvnet.staxex:stax-ex:jar:RELEASE"
# add dependency (for download purposes)
artifact(STAX_EX_RELEASE).enhance([artifact(STAX_EX)])
# create alias
artifact(STAX_EX_RELEASE).from(repositories.locate(STAX_EX))
The on-going integration with Aether should get us better Maven/pom
support... if this is a blocker for you, it could also be implemented in
buildr with our custom pom support. Either way, feel free to file an
enhancement request or hack something together and submit a patch.
alex
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Khristian <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm building a project with buildr that depends indirectly on the
> stax-ex library. The problem is, some dependency seems to be looking
> for the RELEASE version of this library.
>
> It fails with:
>
> (...)
> Downloading org.jvnet.staxex:stax-ex:pom:RELEASE
> Buildr aborted!
> RuntimeError : Failed to download
> org.jvnet.staxex:stax-ex:pom:RELEASE,(...)
>
> I've noticed that the metadata file for stax-ex has an entry for the
> RELEASE version:
> (...)
> <versioning>
> <latest>1.6</latest>
> <release>1.6</release>
> (...)
>
> This seems to be related to a recent e-mail sent to the list (though
> it only mentions the maven keyword LATEST).
>
> Any ideas?
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Khristian Alexander Schönrock
>