2009/9/1 Nicolas Lalevée <nicolas.lale...@anyware-tech.com> > On Monday 31 August 2009 17:39:57 Xavier Hanin wrote: > > 2009/8/26 Nicolas Lalevée <nicolas.lale...@hibnet.org> > > > > > On Tuesday 25 August 2009 15:00:33 Xavier Hanin wrote: > > > > 2009/8/24 Nicolas Lalevée <nicolas.lale...@hibnet.org> > > > > > > > > The problem with that is how people would get only the main jar of > > > > their dependencies? Using an artifact type filter? That doesn't sound > > > > good IMO. > > > > > > I thought types where meant to be used for that kind of use case. > > > > I'd say types are meant to deal with use cases where you don't have > > configurations properly setup to get only the type you want. Most of the > > time I prefer to use only conf, with no type filter. But it's only my > point > > of view, maybe others think differently. > > I see the configuration and types as defining two orthogonal concepts. One > is > defining in which way the dependency would be used, the types just being > the > type of artifact. An exemple I like to show is slf4j: > <configurations> > <conf name="default" extends="simple" /> > <conf name="core" /> > <conf name="simple" extends="core" /> > <conf name="log4j" extends="core" /> > <conf name="nop" extends="core" /> > <conf name="jcl" extends="core" /> > ... > </configurations> > <publications> > <artifact name="slf4j-api" type="jar" ext="jar" conf="core" /> > <artifact name="slf4j-api" type="source" ext="jar" conf="core" /> > <artifact name="slf4j-simple" type="jar" ext="jar" conf="simple" /> > <artifact name="slf4j-simple" type="source" ext="jar" conf="simple" > /> > <artifact name="slf4j-nop" type="jar" ext="jar" conf="nop" /> > <artifact name="slf4j-nop" type="source" ext="jar" conf="nop" /> > <artifact name="slf4j-jcl" type="jar" ext="jar" conf="jcl" /> > <artifact name="slf4j-jcl" type="source" ext="jar" conf="jcl" /> > ... > </publications> > <dependencies> > <dependency org="org.apache.commons" name="commons-logging" > rev="1.1.1" conf="jcl->default" /> > <dependency org="org.apache.log4j" name="log4j" rev="1.2.15" > conf="log4j->default" /> > </dependencies> > > Then if I want to not use type and use the configurations, it would be > quite > painfull to specify the configurations sources-api, sources-simple, > sources-nop, etc.....
With configurations intersection introduced in latest version it's easy to use confs for these orthogonal axes instead of relying on types. But if you really like using types for that I don't see any problem. The question is: do we "force" people to use types filters by having metadata artifacts in the same confs as the main ones? I think in that case we would have to define a default filter for the type for better out of the box experience, and it wouldn't be backward compatible anyway. So I think we agree it's better to stick with confs for sources and javadocs in m2 modules. Xavier -- Xavier Hanin - 4SH France - http://www.4sh.fr/ BordeauxJUG creator & leader - http://www.bordeauxjug.org/ Apache Ivy Creator - http://ant.apache.org/ivy/
