[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-341?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Gilles Scokart updated IVY-341:
-------------------------------
Priority: Minor (was: Critical)
> Include Caller Revision as an attribute in the Ivy Dependency Report xml
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: IVY-341
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IVY-341
> Project: Ivy
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Affects Versions: 1.4
> Environment: Windows -XP
> Reporter: S B
> Assignee: Gilles Scokart
> Priority: Minor
>
> Following is the extract from the topic posted in the forum -
> SB writes -
> Here is an extract from the xml file that Ivy 1.4 generated -
> ============================================================
> [lt]module organisation="ABC" name="ppf" resolver="default"
> [lt]revision name="2.08.02.001" status="release" pubdate="20050701155119"
> resolver="shared" artresolver="shared" downloaded="false" searched="false"
> default="false" conf="ear" position="32"[rt]
> [lt]caller organisation="ABC" name="exchangeservices" conf="jar"
> rev="2.08.02.001"/[gt]
> [lt]/revision[gt]
> [lt]/module[gt]
> =================================================================
> It is possible that I have two revisions of exchangeservices. I was expecting
> to see the revision of exchange services in the rev attribute and not the
> revision of ppf. What am I missing?
> Thanks for any help.
> - SB
> ? Newbie: where is ? Avoiding ambiguous "configuration" concept ?
> ? add new comment | 50 reads | subscribe post
> I understand your surprise,
> Submitted by xavier on Wed, 2006-11-08 08:32.
> I understand your surprise, the file is normal, what is not well chosen if
> the name of the attribute, it should be asked-rev, because it corresponds
> actually to the revision of the called module as requested by the caller.
> Thus it can be latest.integration for instance. This information is helpful,
> but I agree that having the revision of the caller could be helpful too, so I
> suggest adding a jira issue for that. Unfortunately to avoid backward
> compatibility problem we'll have to stick with rev for the asked revision,
> and maybe use caller-rev for the caller revision.
> __________________________________
> Xavier Hanin
> Jayasoft team member
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
