I'm amused how your single question give 3 answers (I'll add mine) that are all accurate, but answer to a different interpretation of your question
my own interpretation of your question: PMD plugin has some reporting goals, that depend on Doxia. And if report mojos get Doxia dependencies injected by maven-site-plugin when run as reports, they can also be run as direct mojos, where maven-site-plugin is not there to inject any depency (be it declared or not, or declared but ignored) My answer is as right as others, it's simply another interpretation of your question: every interpretation of your question looks reasonable, AFAIK nobody answered completely out of scope. Please tell us what more precise question was yours, and if you found your answer from the 3 :) Regards Hervé Le samedi 24 décembre 2016, 18:40:22 CET Guillaume Boué a écrit : > Why would the PMD plugin care about what Doxia require transitively? > Christian, can you explain a bit more why those changes are needed? > > Le 24/12/2016 à 17:59, Hervé BOUTEMY a écrit : > > +1 > > > > notice that it may show that we have an issue with the way transitivity + > > nearest resolution are applied > > > > IIUC this case, we have: > > 1. a direct dependency with scope = test > > 2. a transitive dependency with scope = compile > > > > the result can't be just the direct dependency with scope=test: scope of > > direct dependency has to switch to compile (and I don't know which version > > should be kept: direct or transitive) > > > > I'm sure we have edge cases with transitive dependencies algorithm and > > scopes > > > > For a long time now, I want to create a builder API to create dependencies > > unit tests, to ease creating tests, avoiding the nightmare of creating a > > bunch of pom.xml files in a test local repo that are used by a unit test, > > with hard to document rationale > > Seems like it is time to work on it now... > > > > Regards, > > > > Hervé > > > > Le samedi 24 décembre 2016, 17:03:03 CET Robert Scholte a écrit : > >> With this commit commons-io gets the default scope. > >> Suppose PMD drops commons-io, then there's no reason that this dependency > >> has the compile scope. > >> Assuming the unittests are using commons-io it makes sense that it has > >> the > >> test-scope. > >> Be aware that users can overwrite dependencies of plugins in their > >> pom.xml > >> Developers can only know about the dependencies for their src/main/java > >> and src/test/java code, and cannot do any assumptions about transitive > >> dependencies due to all the override mechanisms in Maven. > >> It may be clear that I don't like these changes. > >> > >> Robert > >> > >> On Sat, 24 Dec 2016 15:56:53 +0100, <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> Author: schulte > >>> Date: Sat Dec 24 14:56:53 2016 > >>> New Revision: 1775971 > >>> > >>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1775971&view=rev > >>> Log: > >>> [MPMD-230] Required class missing: org/apache/commons/io/IOUtils > >>> > >>> Modified: > >>> maven/plugins/trunk/maven-pmd-plugin/pom.xml > >>> > >>> Modified: maven/plugins/trunk/maven-pmd-plugin/pom.xml > >>> URL: > >>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/maven/plugins/trunk/maven-pmd-plugin/pom.xm > >>> l? > >>> rev=1775971&r1=1775970&r2=1775971&view=diff > >>> ======================================================================== > >>> = > >>> ===== --- maven/plugins/trunk/maven-pmd-plugin/pom.xml (original) > >>> +++ maven/plugins/trunk/maven-pmd-plugin/pom.xml Sat Dec 24 14:56:53 > >>> 2016 > >>> @@ -216,13 +216,13 @@ under the License. > >>> > >>> <groupId>org.apache.httpcomponents</groupId> > >>> <artifactId>httpclient</artifactId> > >>> <version>4.3.5</version> > >>> > >>> - <scope>test</scope> > >>> + <!-- scope>test</scope> Required by Doxia transitively. --> > >>> > >>> </dependency> > >>> <dependency> > >>> > >>> <groupId>commons-io</groupId> > >>> <artifactId>commons-io</artifactId> > >>> <version>2.5</version> > >>> > >>> - <scope>test</scope> > >>> + <!-- scope>test</scope> Required by PMD transitively. --> > >>> > >>> </dependency> > >>> > >>> </dependencies> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > --- > L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le > logiciel antivirus Avast. https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
