Github user aprelev commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/ant-ivy/pull/73
As of now, two sets of dependencies are constructed in a different ways:
- *currently resolved dependecies* are produced by Ivy resolve engine, with
**both qualified and unqualified attributes** (`super.qualifiedExtraAttributes
!= super.extraAttributes`), and
- *previously resolved dependencies* are parsed from last report by
`XmlReportParser`, with **unqualified attributes only**
(`super.qualifiedExtraAttributes == super.extraAttributes`).
Set comparison at `ConfigurationResolveReport::checkIfChanged()` invokes
`ModuleRevisionId::equals()` for individual dependencies comparison, which
compares `super.qualifiedExtraAttributes` maps as in:
```Java
@Override
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
...
return other.getRevision().equals(getRevision())
&& !(other.getBranch() == null && getBranch() != null)
&& !(other.getBranch() != null &&
!other.getBranch().equals(getBranch()))
&& other.getModuleId().equals(getModuleId())
&&
other.getQualifiedExtraAttributes().equals(getQualifiedExtraAttributes()); //<
here
}
```
which, obviously, yields a `false`, since keys in
`other.getQualifiedExtraAttributes()` map are stripped of qualifiers as
explained above.
That is why I introduced parameterised version of
`ExtendableItemHelper::getExtraAttributes()` used by `XmlReportParser`, this
way parsed dependencies have both versions of qualifiers, same as resolved
dependencies.
As I pointed out in original PR message, issue may instead be solved by
modifying `ModuleRevisionId::equals()` to use `super.extraAttributes`, provided
attributes namespaces cannot clash, of course, which will result in ignoring
qualifiers:
```Java
@Override
public boolean equals(Object obj) {
...
return other.getRevision().equals(getRevision())
&& !(other.getBranch() == null && getBranch() != null)
&& !(other.getBranch() != null &&
!other.getBranch().equals(getBranch()))
&& other.getModuleId().equals(getModuleId())
&& other.getExtraAttributes().equals(getExtraAttributes()); //<
ignoring qualifiers
}
```
At what point do you suggest we check for presense of `':'` in the names of
attributes?
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
