exclusions are a method of last resort, to help you compensate for bad
upstream metadata...usage of <includes> in the dependency declaration
makes this method much more prone to [ab]use IMO.
When we decided to include <exclusions/>, we understood that it *should*
be a fleeting problem, depending on the community's guidance to help us
keep the repository metadata clean. If a project cannot break itself up
into modules with no optional dependencies, fine; use optional
dependencies. However, if a project is correct in its use of optional
deps, there should *never* be a reason to use <exclusions/>. Also, as
that project's metadata is improved in the repository (again, by
community participation), these <exclusions> should become redundant.
We really don't want to promote dependency-level modifications a la
<inclusions/> and <exclusions/> for this type of management...it doesn't
really help others using that bad metadata. Instead, the publisher of
that project should be under some pressure to correct its dependency
specifications.
My US$0.02
-john
Piotr Bzdyl wrote:
Hello,
AFAIK maven does not include optional dependencies (unless you specify
you want them). The problem is that usually, they are not declared as
optional in the POMs in the repository (though I could be wrong
here..)
I am not sure not but I tried some time ago and I think that it
included. Anyway, does it support <includes> element in the <dependency>?
Best regards,
Piotrek
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
