Rather, it omits the packaging type:
.setPackaging(forgeDep.getCoordinate().getPackaging())
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Lincoln Baxter, III <
lincolnbaxter(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The reason the dependency resolution fails is because the Gradle
addon is
omitting the dependency type from the coordinates, here. It is trying to
resolve a JAR but only a POM exists.
private GradleDependencyBuilder forgeDepToGradleDepBuilder(Dependency
forgeDep)
{
return GradleDependencyBuilder.create()
.setConfiguration(GradleDependencyConfiguration
.fromMavenScope(forgeDep.getScopeType()).getName())
.setGroup(forgeDep.getCoordinate().getGroupId())
.setName(forgeDep.getCoordinate().getArtifactId())
.setVersion(forgeDep.getCoordinate().getVersion());
}
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Lincoln Baxter, III <
lincolnbaxter(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Adam,
>
> Seems like things have been a bit quiet, but I've been reviewing the
> Forge Gradle Addon, and it's looking good! I've reproduced the dependency
> resolution issue you ran in to, but I'm not exactly sure where the error
> lies. Looking in to it.
>
> You asked what to work on next. And I think that if you have finished all
> of the core/required functionality, it might be interesting to add a Forge
> UICommand/UIWizard to set up this eclipse config:
>
>
http://www.gradle.org/docs/current/userguide/eclipse_plugin.html
>
> That should make it easier for people to import Gradle projects into
> eclipse. Do you think this has value?
>
> Alternatively, have you tested the scenario where a user attempts to use
> an existing Gradle project with Forge? It does not appear that this is
> tested yet, so that might be useful to explore. I believe this may raise a
> few new issues like, "Should we modify the user's gradle.build script in
> order to support Forge operations?" and "How should we ask them?"
>
> It's possible that you could simply create a temporary build descriptor
> with the required forge library, execute that, then delete it. Or perhaps a
> new command in Forge to "Make a gradle project editable by forge."
>
> Thoughts?
>
> --
> Lincoln Baxter, III
>
http://ocpsoft.org
> "Simpler is better."
>
--
Lincoln Baxter, III
http://ocpsoft.org
"Simpler is better."