You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@maven.apache.org by Oliver Noelle <Ol...@bmw-carit.de> on 2004/11/23 12:08:01 UTC

Bug or conceptual limitation?

I don't know if the following behaviour is intended or a bug.

If it is a bug and you want me to file a bug report, please let me know 
in which project I should file it in jira.


Assume the following setting:

For a project "x" we produce with a custom goal two artifacts
1. x.dll
2. x.model (for example some model of the component x)
and deploy both to the repository.

Another project needs both these artifacts, and thus states in its pom:

    <dependency>
      <groupId>y</groupId>
      <artifactId>x</artifactId>
      <type>dll</type>
      <version>0.1</version>
    </dependency>
    <dependency>
      <groupId>y</groupId>
      <artifactId>x</artifactId>
      <type>model</type>
      <version>0.1</version>
    </dependency>


In maven-1.0 (I have not tested 1.0.1 yet), the second dependency is 
completely ignored, eg.
1. it will NOT be downloaded from central repository
2. some jelly code such as

      <j:forEach items="${pom.dependencies}" var="dep">
          <ant:echo>"${dep.artifact}"</ant:echo>
      </j:forEach>

will NOT produce any output for the second dependency.


=> Question 1: Is this a known limitation of the maven pom concept to 
allow only one artifact with a given groupId/artifactId combination or a 
bug?

=> Question 2: If bug: Does anyone know whether maven-1.0.1 fixes this?

=> Question 3: If limitation: any proposals for a workaround?

Thanks,

Oliver


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org


Re: Bug or conceptual limitation?

Posted by Julien Kirch <j....@laposte.net>.
More stuff here : http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MAVEN-1087

Julien

Brett Porter wrote:

>search the archives for more information (typically it refers to
>tlds). Fixed in 1.1. The JIRA roadmap for 1.1 will have it listed.
>(1.0.1 does not contain the fix, it is not backwards compatible).
>  
>



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org


Re: Bug or conceptual limitation?

Posted by Brett Porter <br...@gmail.com>.
search the archives for more information (typically it refers to
tlds). Fixed in 1.1. The JIRA roadmap for 1.1 will have it listed.
(1.0.1 does not contain the fix, it is not backwards compatible).

- Brett


On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 12:08:01 +0100, Oliver Noelle
<ol...@bmw-carit.de> wrote:
> I don't know if the following behaviour is intended or a bug.
> 
> If it is a bug and you want me to file a bug report, please let me know
> in which project I should file it in jira.
> 
> Assume the following setting:
> 
> For a project "x" we produce with a custom goal two artifacts
> 1. x.dll
> 2. x.model (for example some model of the component x)
> and deploy both to the repository.
> 
> Another project needs both these artifacts, and thus states in its pom:
> 
>     <dependency>
>       <groupId>y</groupId>
>       <artifactId>x</artifactId>
>       <type>dll</type>
>       <version>0.1</version>
>     </dependency>
>     <dependency>
>       <groupId>y</groupId>
>       <artifactId>x</artifactId>
>       <type>model</type>
>       <version>0.1</version>
>     </dependency>
> 
> In maven-1.0 (I have not tested 1.0.1 yet), the second dependency is
> completely ignored, eg.
> 1. it will NOT be downloaded from central repository
> 2. some jelly code such as
> 
>       <j:forEach items="${pom.dependencies}" var="dep">
>           <ant:echo>"${dep.artifact}"</ant:echo>
>       </j:forEach>
> 
> will NOT produce any output for the second dependency.
> 
> => Question 1: Is this a known limitation of the maven pom concept to
> allow only one artifact with a given groupId/artifactId combination or a
> bug?
> 
> => Question 2: If bug: Does anyone know whether maven-1.0.1 fixes this?
> 
> => Question 3: If limitation: any proposals for a workaround?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Oliver
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org
> 
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@maven.apache.org