So I would recommend using the simplified form when possible, but using the
expanded form when extended artifact configuration is required.
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Lincoln Baxter, III <
lincolnbaxter(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Please see the gradle DependencyHandler docs for reference. I believe
it
explains how to resolve this :)
http://www.gradle.org/docs/current/dsl/org.gradle.api.artifacts.dsl.Depen...
This states that the mechanism for declaring dependencies follows the form
below:
apply plugin: 'java' //so that I can declare 'compile' dependencies
dependencies {
//configuring dependency to specific configuration of the module
compile configuration: 'someConf', group: 'org.someOrg', name:
'someModule', version: '1.0'
//configuring dependency on 'someLib' module
compile(group: 'org.myorg', name: 'someLib', version:'1.0') {
//explicitly adding the dependency artifact:
artifact {
name = 'someArtifact' //artifact name different than module name
type = 'jar'
classifier = 'someClassifier'
}
}
}
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Lincoln Baxter, III <
lincolnbaxter(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> 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."
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Lincoln Baxter, III
>
http://ocpsoft.org
> "Simpler is better."
>
--
Lincoln Baxter, III
http://ocpsoft.org
"Simpler is better."