Handle source, docs artifacts correctly for Ivy [1.0.x]

[oxbowlakes]

This is a re-installment of #1016 for the 1.0.x branch, sitting on top of changes already merged in sbt/librarymanagement#25.

To reiterate, specifically in this PR we are addressing the following:

• Introduce the SettingKeys sourceArtifactTypes and docArtifactTypes: Sets which contain the artifact types that would qualify them as either source or doc artifacts.
• Use the new ArtifactTypeFilter introduced in Handle source, docs artifacts correctly for Ivy librarymanagement#25 in the update task (specifically, I added it to UpdateConfiguration) to allow "all artifact types except those found in either sourceArtifactTypes ordocArtifactTypes"
• In updateClassifiers / updateSbtClassifiers, invert the filter from the UpdateConfiguration: it will therefore only let through sources and docs
• srcTypes and docTypes now have to also be explicitly passed into GetClassifiersConfiguration because (since Handle source, docs artifacts correctly for Ivy librarymanagement#25) after finishing the update in updateClassifiers, it will map over all artifacts to set their classifier to either sources or javadoc, if it's not already set, according to a reverse mapping from the (src|doc)Types to "source" and "javadoc" respectively (well, Artifact.SourceClassifier and Artifact.DocClassifier, to be precise). This is because the artifacts retrieved from Ivy publications might well not have this attribute set, and last time I checked, IDE plugins such as IntelliJ's depended exactly on this value to classify the artifacts.

Hopefully, after this, plugins could just look at the artifact's type and see in which of the two sets contains it. That would also resolve a great deal of pain surrounding "e:classifier". For instance, I've discovered that it's impossible to use that attribute in an ivy repository if its value is not either "sources" or "javadoc" (e.g. if it's src), because plugins expect it to be one of those two values as mentioned before.

[lightbend-cla-validator]

Hi @dansanduleac,

Thank you for your contribution! We really value the time you've taken to put this together.

Before we proceed with reviewing this pull request, please sign the Typesafe Contributors License Agreement:

http://www.lightbend.com/contribute/cla

[oxbowlakes]

This PR is not from @dansanduleac, it's from @oxbowlakes. I believe that we've already signed the typesafe CLA

[eed3si9n]

Yea you guys should be fine.

[dansanduleac]

Looks like this needs to wait on sbt/zinc#70, and then subsequently on further changes that would get this project to compile cleanly against incrementalcompiler.

[Duhemm]

I think this is superseded by #2478. Thanks @oxbowlakes & @dansanduleac!