2.4.x

[supertick]

No description provided.

[twogee]

Could you please provide a unit test to demonstrate what is wrong with IVY-1576 fix?

[twogee]

I suggest closing this PR. The main problem here is that programmatic use should not be adressed by adding CLI options which make no sense. Also, if resolve() ends with errors, it's best to throw an exception encapsulating whatever relevant information is available, rather than blithely carrying on.

[supertick]

I think it would be great "not" to have an additional CLI option, but then you cannot have a System.exit(1) terminating the client code (https://github.com/apache/ant-ivy/blob/2.4.x/src/java/org/apache/ivy/Main.java#L313) just because of an error.

The errors (and the successes) can be queried out of the ResolveReport. A client can programmatically make decisions based on the data returned. And the run() methods still throw their respective exceptions which could be caught by the client consumer.

The new option is to alleviate the problematic design of having an error terminate a client consumer with a System.exit.

Perhaps a design would be to copy/paste Main.java to IvyClient.java and remove the System.exit - but then it would be less normalized, which has its own flaws.

[wordlessly]

I also spam this pull request. (why not open issue tracker here?)

Ivy CLI says: -types comma separated list of accepted artifact types

java -jar ivy-2.4.0.jar -cache ./ivy -types source,jar ...

does NOT work. What does work is a white space separated list of artifacts.

[twogee]

Issue tracker for the project is JIRA. Apache has own Git infrastructure, GitHub is used to increase exposure and as easy means to suggest code changes (rather than uploading patches).

Please check the latest Ivy build. I cannot verify your report right now, but the value of types should be split correctly in master.

[twogee]

@supertick FYI, Ivy 2.5.0 RC is on the way, @nlalevee has kindly taken the role of release manager. Your latest commits are not merged to master, though. If you are interested in using 2.5.0, please let us know.

[sutchark]

How should we let you know? Here?

I am interested in using 2.5.0.

[twogee]

Check out the nightlies
I was commenting here because @supertick is apparently pushing changes to 2.4.x release branch, but the RC is from the master.

[bodewig]

can anybody explain what this PR is about? The title doesn't say so.

2.4.x is a dead end, there won't be any new 2.4.x releases.

[twogee]

AFAICR, this is an attempt to backport stuff to 2.4.x branch (which for some reasons is considered superior; I believe that might be related to SBT using their own fork). Hope @eric-milles improvements may be useful for resolving the schism ;-)