using sbt 0.12 binary version suffix _2.10

[Eugene Yokota]

Hi,

I wanted to share a hack to use _2.10 suffix with conscript.

scalaxb uses _2.10 suffix to take advantage of the binary compat.

When I changed the launchconfig to 2.10.0, here's what happened:

$ cs eed3si9n/scalaxb

Getting org.scalaxb scalaxb_2.10.0 1.0.1 ...

:: problems summary ::

:::: WARNINGS

module not found: org.scalaxb#scalaxb_2.10.0;1.0.1

I figured it's because conscript is using sbt 0.11.3 internally, so I emulated the launcher change as follows:

$ java $CONSCRIPT_OPTS -Xmx1G -jar ~/Applications/sbt/sbt-launch-0.12.0.jar @"/Users/foo/.conscript/eed3si9n/scalaxb/scalaxb/launchconfig"

Getting org.scalaxb scalaxb_2.10.0 1.0.1 ...

:: problems summary ::

:::: WARNINGS

module not found: org.scalaxb#scalaxb_2.10.0;1.0.1

Still the same problem.

Here's a workaround I came up with:

[app]

  version: 1.0.1

  org: org.scalaxb

  name: scalaxb_2.10

  class: scalaxb.compiler.SbtApp

  cross-versioned: false

[scala]

  version: 2.10.0

[repositories]

  sonatype-public: https://oss.sonatype.org/content/repositories/public/

  maven-central

When cross-versioned setting is true, sbt calculates the module ID to be name + "_" + scala.version.

By turning this off, I was able to manually supply _2.10 suffix. This works with the current conscript.

-eugene

[n8han]

If the launcher version is the only problem, you don't even need a new version of conscript. I just updated the setup script and it fetches the latest launcher for me:

curl https://raw.github.com/n8han/conscript/master/setup.sh | sh

I've also updated the runnable jar installer and am testing it now. For that I'll need to publish a new version.

Nathan

[eugene yokota]

sbt 0.12 launcher also has the problem. I was working the fix this for 0.13 this weekend.

-eugene

--
 
 

[Nathan Hamblen]

Okay. I already published a new version of cs (0.4.2) but I'll hold off on announcing it then.

Nathan

--