On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 19:02:57 +0100 "Xavier Hanin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 6:35 PM, Harald Braumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > From the many, many hours of experience I have in fixing dependency > > problems, I can tell you that for any reasonable complex > > project, automatic conflict resolution does not work and leads to a > > lot of problems and headache. Thus I want to be in control of the > > versions. Once this is supported by ivy, my plan is to create a > > tool that creates the versions file for you. It would resolve all > > the dependencies recursively and write the versions file. It would > > also tell you all conflict, which you have to resolve by hand (IMHO > > the only sensible thing to do). If you change any dependency, you > > re-run the tool and it tells you all the new conflicts (by > > comparing with the old version of the versions file). > > Interesting idea. Note that if you need overriding only when you have > conflicts, the conflicts/manager elements in Ivy files can already > fit your needs AFAIU: you run a resolve with a conflict manager which > only collects conflicts from your tool, then ask the user to select > versions, and create the conflict management section to include in > your main ivy file. Since inclusion is not (yet?) supported, you > still need to do some kind of automatic merging before giving this to > Ivy, but this is not the hardest part. The end result would be really > close to what you would have with a dependency override mechanism, > except that conflicts would still appear as conflicts in dependency > reports. WDYT? That would solve the problem of overriding conflicts. But in addition I would like to be able to specify versions to use for multiple modules in a single place. Modularising a project has a couple of advantages. But it also adds complexity, which makes modularisation kind of a PITA. Our project, and also some open source projects I follow, which went the stony path of modularisation (see e.g. X.org) put a lot of effort into custom tools just to make the building and installation somehow manageable. And still they have problems constantly. Now I think that it doesn't have to be like this. The pain could be alleviated by proper tool support and a dependency management system seems to be the perfect match. harry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
