New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Prevent platform_feature creation #25
Comments
Hold on, this seems to be a side effect of the Maven dependency I was trying this on.
|
This seems to happen if the artifact is a .pom. Perhaps I am making the wrong assumption, here.
|
If I remember correctly the platform feature is needed because it describes what is to be content of the p2 repository / update site. If you don't give the same ID to the platform feature as to one of the others you shouldn't have a problem. The platform feature exists in addition to any feature that you define. I'm not sure, but it might cause problems when you have feature IDs that are equal to bundle symbolic names. So you could try something like I'm not sure what you mean with pom dependency - bundles can only be created for Jars, so it might be that it is skipped if it's only artifact is a pom. Might also be that is ignored in the dependency mechanism because there is no Jar. |
The .pom is a container, a convience construct to get all the jars of GWT. Of course, if it gets ignored, its dependencies will be ignored, as well. Which explains the empty feature. |
Well, I just say it might. I have no idea how Gradle deals with this kind of dependency. Does it work for you in other Gradle projects? If your dependency is a so-called bill-of-materials (bom) which is supported in Maven, you might need a third-party plugin to be able to resolve it. See for instance here, here and here. |
Assuming this is solved, as there was no further feedback. Please reopen if that's not the case. |
Hi,
I was wondering why there is a need for the platform_feature.
Isn't it possible to have the features created with their plugin dependencies populated directly? Now all the dependencies are populated at the level of the platform_feature. I could be mistaken, but doesn't that kind of break the feature definitions?
Cheers,
Dann
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: