[GRADLE-3119] Dynamic version resolution does not consider the `latest` element of maven-metadata.xml Created: 02/Jul/14 Updated: 10/Feb/17 Resolved: 10/Feb/17 |
|
Status: | Resolved |
Project: | Gradle |
Affects Version/s: | None |
Fix Version/s: | None |
Type: | Bug | ||
Reporter: | Gradle Forums | Assignee: | Unassigned |
Resolution: | Won't Fix | Votes: | 0 |
Issue Links: |
|
Description |
When Gradle tries to resolve a dependency with version containing "+", it does not consider the the "latest" version as specified by maven-matadata.xml. Instead, Gradle uses the "versions" lists and uses the built-in version selection algorithm to choose the latest version. _Example_ At the time of posting repository maven-metadata.xml contained: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> Repository artifacts (latest ones) with last modififed date were: 1.5.0.M1/ 09-Apr-2014 08:04 _Expected Result__ _Actual Result_ When Gradle resolves dependencies it takes "1.5.0.RC1" over "1.5.0.RELEASE" which is defined in maven-metadata.xml. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
Comments |
Comment by Gradle Forums [ 02/Jul/14 ] |
Just wondering If this is actually an proper behavior as for me it does sound a bit backwards... |
Comment by Daz DeBoer [ 21/Feb/16 ] |
Note: It's unclear as to whether this is really a bug. According to Mark's comment on |
Comment by Benjamin Muschko [ 15/Nov/16 ] |
As announced on the Gradle blog we are planning to completely migrate issues from JIRA to GitHub. We intend to prioritize issues that are actionable and impactful while working more closely with the community. Many of our JIRA issues are inactionable or irrelevant. We would like to request your help to ensure we can appropriately prioritize JIRA issues you’ve contributed to. Please confirm that you still advocate for your JIRA issue before December 10th, 2016 by:
We look forward to collaborating with you more closely on GitHub. Thank you for your contribution to Gradle! |
Comment by Benjamin Muschko [ 10/Feb/17 ] |
Thanks again for reporting this issue. We haven't heard back from you after our inquiry from November 15th. We are closing this issue now. Please create an issue on GitHub if you still feel passionate about getting it resolved. |