Le jeu. 6 nov. 2025 à 06:48, Vladimir Sitnikov <[email protected]>
a écrit :

> >since you have conflict in transitive
> >pom - depMgt or not, the only one able to solve the conflict in a relevant
> >manner is the integrator *by design*.
>
> Romain, this literally means "all conflicts must be solved by the
> integrator, and the tool
> must not have automatic conflict resolution".
>

This is what maven enforcer plugin enables actually.
I'm not the biggest fan of that but it has some pro in terms of control and
determinism in times.


>
> It implies Maven should stop doing its "nearest wins" conflict resolution
> and defer to the integrator
> to resolve the conflicts.
>

No, what I mean is we must not have a tons of these, we have one which
works well nd satisfies most people cause it is aligned on their pom (and
underlying tree definition).
If you start having multiples you mess up consumers as explained cause the
resolution looks random and unexpected for lib writers.

When this doesn't satisfies you -> do it manually as an integrator.


>
> If you think Maven should drop automatic conflict resolution, go ahead, and
> suggest your proposals
> on a different thread please.
>
> In this thread I suggest improvements to the **existing** **automatic**
> conflict resolution to make it
> even better for the end-users.
>

Still not, you propose to break most users and make the lib writer life a
nightmare in practise.
How would you solve the fact two libs using the same transitive lib use
different strategies? -> you force the integrator/consumer to explicit the
lib, as of today, no gain.


>
> Vladimir
>

Reply via email to