Maven Javadoc Plugin
  1. Maven Javadoc Plugin
  2. MJAVADOC-198

AbstractJavadocMojo#getClasspath(..) should use subProject's managedVersionMap

    Details

    • Type: Bug Bug
    • Status: Closed Closed
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: 2.4
    • Fix Version/s: 2.5
    • Labels:
      None
    • Patch Submitted:
      Yes
    • Number of attachments :
      1

      Description

      Hi,
      We had a problem using Eclipse artifacts that contain version qualifiers, e.g. artifact foo version 3.3.0-SomeQualifier is not resolved
      when the dependency version definition uses a version range e.g.:
      <dependency>
      <artifactId>foo<artifactId>
      <version>[3.3.0,4.0.0)</version>
      <groupId>some Group...</groupId>
      <dependency>

      We found a workaround for this described here: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MECLIPSE-405.
      The workaround is to use maven 2.0.9+ and define concrete versions for the eclipse artifacts in a <dependencyManagement> section of our project, thus overriding the range version definitions in some of the eclipse poms.

      e.g.:

      <dependencyManagement>
      <dependencies>
      <dependency>
      <groupId>org.eclipse.equinox</groupId>
      <artifactId>common</artifactId>
      <version>3.3.0-v20070426</version>
      </dependency>
      ....
      </dependencies>
      <dependencyManagement>

      This helped us to build our project without getting version range issues, however when we ran javadoc:javadoc we found out that
      the javadoc dependency resolution does not take into account the <dependencyManagement> section and we still get
      the error:

      An error has occurred in JavaDocs report generation: Couldn't find a version in [3.2.0-v20060603, 3.3.0-v20070426] to match range [3.3.0,4.0.0)
      org.eclipse.equinox:common:jar:null

      When we examined the getClasspath(..) method of AbstractJavadocMojo we found out that it uses the ArtifactResolver#resolveTransitively(..)
      method that lacks the "managedVersions" Map parameter.
      We made an according patch to use the method that specifies it, and our problem was solved.

      So the question is whether the usage of the #resolveTransitively(..) that lacks "managedVersions" parameter is intentional or not.
      If there is no problem with it, we would be very happy if you could change this, so that we can successfully use the javadoc plugin in our project.

      Kind Regards,
      Detelin

        Activity

        Hide
        Vincent Siveton added a comment -

        Patch applied in r677561, snapshot deployed

        Show
        Vincent Siveton added a comment - Patch applied in r677561, snapshot deployed

          People

          • Assignee:
            Vincent Siveton
            Reporter:
            Detelin Yordanov
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            1 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: