Michal Maczka wrote: > Group Dependencies (aka composite artifacts) is the feature which > enables to define a single dependency on multiple artifacts. > > Depenedecny Group is the feature which allows to logically group > dependencies in poms and for example > mark some dependencies as optional. > > I do believe that the first feature is actually very useful and not > at all against maven's philosophy and it > can eliminate completly the need of having "dependency groups". Simply > if we take hiberante as example > hibernate team can publish just one jar and multiple poms - for > example: hibernate-full.3.0.pom, hibernate-minimal-3.0.pom, > hibernate-jcs.3.0.pom etc. Those poms will list the dependecies which > are needed in diffrent cirumstances. > Of couse jars like hibernate-full.3.0.jar will not exists.
Michal, I'm confused. You seem to be talking about the latter, not the first one. I think splitting the pom of an artifact is a very bad idea, especially if those jars don't exist. What we've suggested in the past, and I pointed out in my email, was that a "profile", similar to Ivy's concept of a "configuration" would be more appropriate. It could be used to split off optional dependencies, but I wouldn't recommend it - I'd recommend splitting out the code that used that if it were the case. It's main use would be for getting the appropriate dependency on a particular platform (JDK, OS, etc). - Brett --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
