[jira] Resolved: (IVY-366) Scope and status leakage during build lifecycle

["Maarten Coene (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-366?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Maarten Coene resolved IVY-366.
-------------------------------

    Resolution: Fixed

> 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.