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

["Gilles Scokart (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-366?page=comments#action_12461172 ] 
            
Gilles Scokart commented on IVY-366:
------------------------------------

I see two level of scopes : the configuration scope, and the resolution scope.

The scope you mention herebefore is the resolution scope where a sub-project make a new resolve/retrieve that shoul be be scoped separately.
The configuration scope is a scope where you allow sub-project to use an other configuration (might have a different repository, or might have different conflict handler, or ...).


I think an elegant way to implement that is to create two ant data types (exist already +/-, but are not clearly exposed to ant scripts): 
1.  An IvyEngine that can be used to scope the configuration
2. An IvyResolution that can be used to scope the resolve/retrieve.

Like others ant datatypes, those object have a id that can be reference by the user in his script.  Every post-resolve task should accept an IvyResolution 
refid.  Every other task that rely on the configuration should accept a IvyEngine refid.   A default value can be configured for backaward compatibility reasons.

The IvyEngine objects would be created by the configure task, and the IvyResolution objects will be created by a resolve (or a retrieve).  An additional id parameter will have to be added to those tasks. (Here also, a default value is possible).

Alternatively, you can also imagine a more declarative aproach where your IvyEngine and IvyResolution can be declared anywhere as standalone data type, and referenced by task the tasks that should be scoped by them.


> Scope and status leakage during build lifecycle
> -----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: IVY-366
>                 URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-366
>             Project: Ivy
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Ant, Core
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.1
>            Reporter: Stephane Bailliez
>
> 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.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira