I'm using 'buildr/xmlbeans' and 'compile_xml_beans _(:source, :main, :xsd)' in my project definition.
1. I'm observing a similar problem to the one I reported yesterday with the resources task. I edited one of my files in src/main/xsd and ran "buildr package". Output: Building myproject Running XMLBeans schema compiler ←[34mredefining Project←[0m Time to build schema type system: 1.727 seconds Time to generate code: 12.038 seconds Compiling myproject into C:/blah/myproject/target/classes Note: Some input files use unchecked or unsafe operations. Note: Recompile with -Xlint:unchecked for details. Packaging myproject Running integration tests... ←[32mCompleted in 1m2.352s←[0m NOTE: myproject.jar was NOT updated. I checked target/classes and verified that the XMLBeans were recompiled and have newer modified dates than the jar. Shouldn't that trigger the package task reassembling the jar? Can anyone verify this? 2. Adding a brand new file to src/main/xsd is not detected by the XMLBeans support at all. I did a "buildr clean package", copied a new XSD into src/main/xsd, and then did a "buildr package". Output: Building myproject Packaging myproject Running integration tests... ←[32mCompleted in 2.723s←[0m Schema generation did not run, compile did not run, and packaging did not run. The new file was ignored. 3. In addon/buildr/xmlbeans.rb, the compile_xml_beans function calls 'compile.using(:javac).from(generated).with(*XMLBeans.requires)'. requires() is defined thus: @requires ||= REQUIRES.artifacts.each(&:invoke).map(&:to_s) ...which resolves to filesystem paths, not artifact specs. This results in compile.dependencies containing two elements that are string filesystem paths instead of Artifact instances, which is screwing with some deployment scripting I am attempting. Removing the '.map(&:to_s)' from the end of that line makes requires() return artifact specs instead and everything works nicely. Does that seem like a reasonable change? I will file an enhancement ticket for this unless someone points out something wrong with it. -- Will P.S. thanks for the excellent support thus far and sorry for continuing to poke the bear ;)
