You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to ivy-commits@incubator.apache.org by "Gilles Scokart (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2007/06/11 06:51:25 UTC
[jira] Updated: (IVY-366) Scope and status leakage during build
lifecycle
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-366?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Gilles Scokart updated IVY-366:
-------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 2.0.0-alpha-2
For me, I have finished. The settings can now be scoped. The only thing still pending is the scoping of the credentialStore. I will raise an other issue for that one specifically.
> Scope and status leakage during build lifecycle
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: IVY-366
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-366
> Project: Ivy
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Ant, Core
> Affects Versions: 1.4.1
> Reporter: Stephane Bailliez
> Assignee: Maarten Coene
> Fix For: 2.0.0-alpha-2
>
> Attachments: IVY-366-settings-scoping-2.patch, IVY-366-settings-scoping-3.patch, IVY-366-settings-scoping-4.patch, IVY-366-settings-scoping.patch
>
>
> Writing this to keep track of the problem following mail in dev@:
> Just a couple of lines about something that has been bothering me for a long time.
> Ivy stores a lot of properties (including an instance of itself after configure) while running, and other tasks add properties on their way as well.
> I don't like very much this as it prevents to do separation of concerns between ivy instances, and resolve calls for example as it basically provides you a couple of nice way to shoot yourself in the foot rather transparently. A minor mistake is enough to make you scratch your head for some time.
> The typical example would be that I have a common build xml which provides all the lifecycle needed for most projects.
> It is doing the resolve for standardized conf and types.
> Projects can override some targets to add their own dependencies and retrieve them.
> Typical example would be to retrieve a binary file (or whatever which is not used for compilation but for running/packaging)
> Which basically means that it must do its own resolve/retrieve call and thus will interfere with the properties that have already been set. So the packaging, publishing process (which is later in the cycle) , may actually be altered by the fact that I have ran a different set of ivy calls.
> NB: This information leakage is particulary evil when you're doing a complex build with different setups where you're doing subant calls. It becomes very very hard to make sure you're not doing something wrong.
> At first I would say: "Would be nice to at least have 'scopes' but there might be a better way.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.