Allowing people to have custom scopes is a thin end of the wedge...
The scopes we have are not sufficient, so I am +1 to expanding them
Custom scopes are a recipe for disaster... the whole point of
standardization is that everyone knows what they mean.
Currently we have:
compile - which we have borked to be transitive but shouldn't be
runtime - fair enough
provided - which is closer to what compile should have been
test - not good enough for the multitude of testing phases
system - Eeek! don't use
import - nobody has a clue what exactly this does
Critically missing from my PoV are:
provides - needs a better name, but I want to signify that I provide a
specific GAV in my pom so that you don't bother trying to pull it in
for another dep... eg. log4j-over-slf4 would provides log4j
test-compile
test-runtime
some scope that is like compile & runtime but not the test classpath...
Actually the more I think about it what you really want to specify, in
a standardized way is the list of classpaths to add to, and whether it
is transitive on that classpath...
And of course in the non-maven world, classpath does not make sense...
but there are equivalents
<dependency>
<groupId>...</groupId>
<artifactId>...</artifactId>
<version>...</version>
<scopes>
<scope>
<name>compile</name>
<transitive>true</transitive>
</scope>
<scope>
<name>runtime</name>
<transitive>false</transitive>
</scope>
<scope>
<name>test</name>
<transitive>true</transitive>
</scope>
</scopes>
</dependency>
Man that's ugly
On 27 June 2011 23:27, Benson Margulies <[email protected]> wrote:
> Two options in my head:
>
> 1) Eliminate the warning.
> 2) Allow some means for officially defining scopes -- the problem
> being that the consumer is the logical place for the definition.
>
>
> 2011/6/27 Arnaud Héritier <[email protected]>:
>> I don't have any pointer in mind except this page which doesn't say much
>> than a stricter validation of POM :
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/MAVEN/maven-3x-compatibility-notes.html#Maven3.xCompatibilityNotes-StricterPOMValidation
>> But that right that in maven 2 we just ignored unknown scopes while maven 3
>> throws a warning
>>
>> Arnaud
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Benson Margulies
>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> In looking at the tomcat plugin, I noticed that it depends on using a
>>> custom scope, and there was commentary complaining that maven 3
>>> complains.
>>>
>>> Is there a thread or a JIRA about this? I'm contemplating creating
>>> something like this of my own, and I'd like to know what trouble I'm
>>> getting myself into.
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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]
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
