I think that storing some extra free values is nice, but I'm not convinced that using real properties is a good thing. It add some complexity to the parsing of the ivy files (where can you use property, can use it inside proerty declaration for instance). If I look at maven pom, it is one of the thing that make it more complexe, with making it more powerfull.
I think the extra value should just be values. For instance, if someone want to store a bug tracking url, an organisation specific code, or anything else in its ivy file, he could store it there. I thought the extra data could be used for that. In the doc [1], it is not clear that when you use extra data in the info tag, you MUST use it also in the dependency tag of the module that use it. I think that should be enhanced. Anyway, I will add an extraInfo field to the module descriptor. Maybe, we can even retrofit all the content of info into it. [1] http://ant.apache.org/ivy/history/latest-milestone/concept.html#extra Gilles 2008/2/13, Xavier Hanin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Feb 13, 2008 9:10 AM, Gilles Scokart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > In the rewrite of the pom parser, I would like to store the maven > > dependency > > managment (and maybe also the properties) into the extra data of the > > moduleRevisionId. > > > > That way, the corresponding ivy module descriptor would contains all the > > info coming from the pom. I think it might be usefull when it is > > serialized > > are reused from the cache (thought I'm not sure if it's the original pom > > or > > the serialized ivy.xml that is used in that case). > > > > However, I have noticed that the extra attributes are used to compare > > moduleRevisionId, and I fear that might bring some problem. Does it? > > > Probably. > > > > > And > > is it normal to use the extra attributes in this comparison? > > > I think so, many time people use extra attributes in the info tag to add > extra identification attributes. I don't really think putty meta > information > such as the dependency management information in extra attributes is a > good > fit. But I like the idea of keeping data from dependency management > section. > Maybe a good way to do it would be to add a Map of properties to the > module > descriptor. This would be another area of flexibility for Ivy users, and > I'd > even see usage for Ivy files, if we actually make them usable as > properties > in the Ivy file. Something like: > <ivy-module version="2.0"> > <info org="foo" name="bar" /> > <property name="foo.baz.revision" value="1.0.4" /> > <dependencies> > <dependency org="foo" name="baz-api" rev="${foo.baz.revision}" /> > <dependency org="foo" name="baz-main" rev="${foo.baz.revision}" /> > <dependency org="foo" name="baz-other" rev="${foo.baz.revision}" /> > </dependencies> > </ivy-module> > > WDYT? > > Xavier > > > > > > > -- > > Gilles Scokart > > > > > > > -- > Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant > http://xhab.blogspot.com/ > http://ant.apache.org/ivy/ > http://www.xoocode.org/ > -- Gilles Scokart
