Thank you for your help. Yes, my original thought was to use the conf mechanism. However, as Xavier suggested, i do need configurations at the submodule level. In addition, the complexity of the project makes declaring and maintaining confs at the product level difficult. I do understand that this is a sign that the architecture of our product needs some refactoring. That's on my list of things to do. Though, the "extra attributes" mechanism sounds like it would work perfectly. Thanks for pointing that out. Scott
Xavier Hanin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 6/25/07, John Gill wrote: > > Maybe I'm missing something, but why not just specify a different conf for > each sub module artifact? This has been suggested in another thread (the same message has been posted twice). But Scott may need configurations in sub modules, in which case configuration support of Ivy may be too limited (no way to express configuration intersections for instance). Xavier On 6/25/07, Gilles Scokart wrote: > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Xavier Hanin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: lundi 25 juin 2007 13:00 > > > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: submodule dependencies > > > > > > On 6/25/07, Gilles Scokart wrote: > > > > > > > > Really? I guess that could be done for the jars, but not for the > > > > ivy.xml files. Indeed, the ivy file must be read in order to get > the > > > > extra fields values. So the pattern of your ivy file can not be > based > > > > on those values. > > > > > > > > Am I wrong? > > > > > > > > > I think so :-) If you put your extra attribute on the dependency > > element, > > > Ivy has enough information to build the pattern even to get the ivy > > files. > > > > Excellent! I missed that. > > > > Gilles > > > > > > > -- > Regards, > John Gill > -- Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant Manage your dependencies with Ivy! http://incubator.apache.org/ivy/
