Wow - thank you Robert. I'll check this out as well. I will send a LinkedIn connection request to you guys - please accept
Scott On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 3:34 AM Robert Scholte <[email protected]> wrote: > You might be interested in the bannedDependencies rule[1] of the Maven > Enforcer Plugin (The Loving Iron Fist of Maven™) > > Robert > > [1] > https://maven.apache.org/enforcer/enforcer-rules/bannedDependencies.html > > On 25-1-2020 04:48:46, Scott Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: > Ok Thank you Elliotte. I've googled checkstyle so will read up on that. > > Another solution: I created a dependency-checker.cfg and .sh file that > looks for my dependencies in the wrong places and fails if it finds any > violations. > It's not as elegant as a checkstyle rule but is a starting point and I'll > figure out the checkstyle. > > Hey, if you and the rest of your team would like to connect on linkedin > I'd love to have you in my network! > linkedin.com/in/HockeyEh > > Scott > linkedin.com/in/HockeyEh > > > > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 8:34 AM Elliotte Rusty Harold <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> That's not going to work for the same reason. >> classpathDependencyExcludes removes a jar from the classpath, and you >> need the jar in the classpath, at least in most circumstances. A >> custom checkstyle rule might solve your problem, but you can't do it >> by changing the classpath. >> >> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 9:19 AM Scott Wilson <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > Thank you for replying Elliotte, >> > I hired someone on Fiverr to try to figure out a workaround for this. >> He was not successful however he may have been close. He added >> <classpathDependencyExcludes> to the build path in the pom.xml. Can you >> take a look at the attached pom and see if there's anything I can do to >> make this work? He was using gson in this example. >> > >> > Scott >> > >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 5:02 AM Elliotte Rusty Harold < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> That's a really interesting idea and I can see the use of it. I'm not >> >> sure it fits with how scopes work in Maven or classpaths in Java >> >> though. A scope generally defines which jars are and are not added to >> >> the classpaths of which goals/plugins/stages, not which parts of the >> >> source tree can see what. Perhaps this would work if your proposed >> >> main scope were added to compile and run but not test? However, I >> >> suspect the transitive dependencies would still be needed in the >> >> classpath or the tests will fail with runtime NoClassDefFoundErrors >> >> and the like. >> >> >> >> What you want sounds a little like strict_java_deps in bazel: >> >> https://blog.bazel.build/2017/06/28/sjd-unused_deps.html >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 2:17 AM Scott Wilson <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > *Hi Robert and devs* >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > *I have been using maven for a few years and I LOVE it!* >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > *I have a feature request.* >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > *(1) When adding a dependency to pom.xml the default scope is >> everywhere* >> >> > >> >> > *ie src/main/java/....* >> >> > >> >> > *and src/tst/java/...* >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > *(2) When adding <test> as the scope then the dependency can ONLY be >> used >> >> > under src/tst/java...* >> >> > >> >> > *If referencing the dependency in src/main/java/... then it will not >> >> > compile* >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > *(3) My feature request:* >> >> > >> >> > *I want the exact opposite. I'd like a new scope called <main>* >> >> > >> >> > *If the scope is <main> then the dependency can ONLY be used under >> >> > src/main/java/...* >> >> > >> >> > *If referencing the dependency in tst/main/java/.... then it will not >> >> > compile* >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > *I read up on scopes >> >> > (** >> https://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-dependency-mechanism.html#Dependency_Scope >> >> > < >> https://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-dependency-mechanism.html#Dependency_Scope >> >) >> >> > *and >> >> > AFAIK this is not currently supported, but I have a specific reason >> for >> >> > wanting this. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > *I'd really appreciate if someone can add that for me and let me >> know when >> >> > it's done.* >> >> > >> >> > *Please let me know if you have any questions.* >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > *Regards* >> >> > >> >> > *Scott Wilson* >> >> > >> >> > *http://linkedin.com/in/hockeyeh <http://linkedin.com/in/hockeyeh>* >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Elliotte Rusty Harold >> >> [email protected] >> >> >> >> -- >> Elliotte Rusty Harold >> [email protected] >> >
