Sent from my iPhone
On 11/04/2014, at 9:23 AM, Barrie Treloar <baerr...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 10 April 2014 23:37, Lennart Jörelid <lennart.jore...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> So ... the consequence of your approach would be that POMs throughout a >> maven reactor would have to repeat a dependency declaration if the classes >> in your maven project "directly" import a type. This - to me - seems not >> only complex to resolve in a big reactor, but quite user-unfriendly as >> well. An example shows this, I think: >> > > This is the *recommended* best practice. > > If you use something directly, then you should be explicit about that > dependency. If I've followed this thread and fully understood it, the proposal is to force the declaration of a dependency in the current Pom, even if they are declared as dependencies of your declared dependency, ie transitive dependencies. Does this not effectively disable the use of transitive dependencies? I find transitive dependencies one of the most useful, powerful features of Maven. Without them, it takes me back to the (horrid) Ant days of manually having walk the dependency tree. And what of consolidation/library poms, where one Pom lists 100's of other jars needed? The WebSphere Process Server one (172 jars!) comes to mind. In short, if I've followed and understood this correctly, and I may not have (holiday time for me), it sounds a very bad idea Igon. -Chris > > http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-dependency-plugin/analyze-mojo.htmlwill > report failures for you so you can check. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
