You are right with the current implementation of ivy. Currently, if I want to link with 1.0, I should put 1.0 in my dependency description.
However, I like to idea to publish a jar and being able to say that it can be used with all 1.x and 2.x. If I do a single test into such scenario, I should test (and compile) with the 1.0. Ideally, of curse, I should test with all versions, and there is already a new feature enter in jira to support that. Gilles > -----Original Message----- > From: Jing Xue [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: lundi 18 juin 2007 17:29 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Working with version ranges > > > Quoting Gilles Scokart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Also, I'm wondering if it wouldn't make sense to take the first > available > > version. Indeed if I say that my modules requires 1.+, I think it's > better > > to compile with a 1.0 version. Indeed, the probability is bigger that a > > version compiled/tested with 1.0 works also with a 1.1 than the opposite > (a > > version compiled/tested with 1.1 working with a 1.0). > > If I always want ivy to pick the oldest, why don't I just say "1.0", > instead of saying "the oldest 1.+"? We want to have notions like "the > latest 1.+", because version numbers keep growing, and we don't know > what the latest is at a particular moment. However that's not the > case on the opposite end - we always know what the oldest version is, > right? > > Or maybe I'm missing some obvious use cases. 8-) > -- > Jing Xue
