On Tue 7 Nov 2017 at 01:32, Charles Honton <[email protected]> wrote: > Are these integration test for the plugin or do the integration tests use > the plugin?
The integration tests use the plugin. (Though there are other use cases too) If the former, then the invoker plugin is appropriate. If the latter, then > a non-code, non-transitive dependency scope is a possibility. No need for a new scope, the plugin tag identifies the dependency Again, this new scope has the backwards compatibility problem.. > > > On Nov 5, 2017, at 11:30 PM, Stephen Connolly < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > Yes it would, but socially people don’t do that... and anyway, there are > > legitimate use cases, eg tomee has (or had if they gave up fighting and > > moved it out of reactor) a plugin that was tied to the container version. > > To allow integration tests in the same reactor as the main codebase, it > is > > reasonable to want the plugin built at the same time. > > -- Sent from my phone
