On Wed 2009-10-28 at 13:29h, Mitch Gitman wrote on ivy-user: > I think it's fair to say that the established best practice is to NOT make a > separate Ivy conf for things like source or Javadoc. > > For one thing, it becomes a transitive dependency nightmare to keep on > having to create a source conf in your Ivy module and then have your source > conf depend on its dependencies' source Ivy confs--which means you need to > add source Ivy confs to those Ivy modules, and so on and so on.
Not sure I agree. You generally have to add a bunch of configurations anyway (compile, runtime, api, test, javadoc, ...). For our in-house modules, we have an XML file defining the common configurations and mappings (it resides along the common build files which are initially retrieved via Ivy as well), and just <include> that file into each ivy.xml. And the mapping for the source configurations is just source->source(default), no difficulties there. Using just filetype, on the other hand, complicates things if you have programmatic artifacts other than jar (ear, dll, ...). Then you'd have to figure out the right list of types to retrieve all required artifacts. If I understand correctly, you always specify type="jar" when retrieving programmatic artifacts? Or do you always retrieve the source along with it, even when packaging? And where do you put javadocs? -- Niklas Matthies
