I do believe we should make this have a project level override. But in general, I think a typical developer would assume that if project A depends on B, both A and B are in the workspace, and both open, then B's code is being used. I can imagine a developer, not seeing the difference in revision being confused as to why a breakpoint in B is not getting hit. Now in general, I think Ivy is intended to be used like this:
1. the info element in an ivy file has a status of "integration", no revision attribute, and no publication date until an artifact is actually published to the repository
2. if A depends on B, in general the revision dependency will be latest.integration until publish time.
At least that is the assumption that IvyDE is making right now. The real trouble comes into play with fix branches themselves. Say A and B each have revisions 1.0.final and 1.1.1. Now development on the main branch along the previously described lines works with IvyDE today. When we adjust our version control snapshot to point at 1.0.final all the code is reverted to 1.0.final. In my workspace latest.integration (which was the same revision I was using when I was doing 1.0.x coding) resolves to the project reference. What happens when we close project B in the workspace? A resolve is performed and latest.integration pulls in the 1.1.1 B jar. Now the 1.0.final A project has a 1.1.1 B dependency. This behavior is unacceptable.
The only way I can see around it is to change the B dependency revision in A to 1.0.+ while I am coding 1.0.x code and then after 1.0.final is built, change the dependency to 1.1.+ . But even though 1.1.+ = latest.integration in this context, IvyDE does not interpret the dependency as a project reference. This is also unacceptable.
With the default behavior of ignoring revisions, when we revert to 1.0.final the project reference is pulled in because the revision is ignored anyway. And when we close B, 1.0.+ resolves to 1.0.final and the 1.0.final A code correctly depends on 1.0.final B jar from the repository.
Your further input is welcome.