Hey John, thanks for the clarification. I just was a little bit confused. :)
In this case +1 for moving the bom up. I'm not sure if it will be used a lot by end users but it doesn't harm to have it and it will reduce the size of our parent pom. Christian 2014/1/6 John D. Ament <[email protected]> > Christian, > > Sorry missed your reply! > > Yes, you're technically right, what's here is actually the BOM based > on standard def: > https://github.com/apache/deltaspike/blob/master/deltaspike/dist/pom.xml > so really what's in the bom folder right now isn't useful. > > So basically, restating what I said previously but pointing to this pom > file. > > John > > On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 3:50 AM, Christian Kaltepoth > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hey John, > > > > just to clear up the situation a bit. AFAIK the bom artifact > > (deltaspike/dist/bom/pom.xml) isn't actually a real bom as it defines all > > the modules as direct dependencies which is more a "depchain". The real > pom > > is the parent (deltaspike/dist/pom.xml) as it defines the versions of the > > modules in a <dependencyManagement> section, correct? > > > > Christian > > > > > > > > 2013/12/23 John D. Ament <[email protected]> > > > >> Romain, > >> > >> Right. My hope is that internally we can list the cross module > >> dependencies in one place. If we're going to prep docs on how a new > >> dev can bring deltaspike to their project, using a bom is a simple > >> tool. > >> > >> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 1:06 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > +-0 while deltaspike doesnt use itself the bom (they lead too often to > >> dep > >> > issues in practise) > >> > Le 23 déc. 2013 02:09, "John D. Ament" <[email protected]> a > écrit > >> : > >> > > >> >> Hi all > >> >> > >> >> Recently for the binary distribution task, I added a bom. I added > >> >> this because the parent pom includes our dependencies, as well as our > >> >> developer list. For someone importing the project to build against, > I > >> >> figured this was a bad idea (we would show as developers in that > >> >> imported pom). However, this ended up adding some double entry. > >> >> > >> >> So I'd like to propose moving this bom up a few directories, and > leave > >> >> this up as the only place to have the modules listed. Importing this > >> >> one into our parent. > >> >> > >> >> WDYT? > >> >> > >> >> John > >> >> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Christian Kaltepoth > > Blog: http://blog.kaltepoth.de/ > > Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal > > GitHub: https://github.com/chkal > -- Christian Kaltepoth Blog: http://blog.kaltepoth.de/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/chkal GitHub: https://github.com/chkal
