Skip to content
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

Analysis of POM-only artifacts fails #100

Open
xsc opened this issue Oct 4, 2023 · 4 comments
Open

Analysis of POM-only artifacts fails #100

xsc opened this issue Oct 4, 2023 · 4 comments

Comments

@xsc
Copy link
Contributor

xsc commented Oct 4, 2023

See this build:
https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/cljdoc/builder/46360/workflows/bf4aca79-e747-4b37-9877-2f70ad3f4c7b/jobs/62735

2023-10-04 09:12:09,207 ERROR cljdoc-analyzer.runner - Could not find artifact com.kohlschutter.junixsocket:junixsocket-core:jar:2.8.0 in central (https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/)
2023-10-04 09:12:09,207 ERROR cljdoc-analyzer.runner - STDOUT
 nil
2023-10-04 09:12:09,207 ERROR cljdoc-analyzer.runner - STDERR
 nil

junixsocket-core is a POM-only dependency of unixsocket-http (whose analysis fails in the above build). Thus, there is no JAR in the Maven repository.

This is how the dependency is declared in project.clj:

[com.kohlschutter.junixsocket/junixsocket-core "2.8.0" :extension "pom"]
@lread
Copy link
Member

lread commented Oct 4, 2023

Hi @xsc! Nice to see you here!

The cljdoc analyzer uses tools.deps to resolve dependencies.
Unlike leiningen, it does not yet support pom-only deps.
See TDEPS-202.

Our current suggested workaround is the same one tools.deps suggests: list the referenced pom-only deps individually.

@lread
Copy link
Member

lread commented Oct 4, 2023

Also, if you haven't already, please feel free to upvote!

@xsc
Copy link
Contributor Author

xsc commented Oct 5, 2023

@lread Thanks for the response, and sorry that I missed an existing issue!

xsc pushed a commit to into-docker/unixsocket-http that referenced this issue Oct 5, 2023
@lread
Copy link
Member

lread commented Oct 5, 2023

My pleasure, and no problem at all.

There is a tentative patch in TDEPS-202, I suppose we could evaluate using this in cljdoc-analyzer.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants