Christian, have you tried to mark your dependency as 'optional' [1]?
LieGrue, strug [1] http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-optional-and-excludes-dependencies.html --- Christian Edward Gruber <[email protected]> schrieb am Fr, 20.3.2009: > Von: Christian Edward Gruber <[email protected]> > Betreff: Re: Scope for compile only? > An: "Maven Developers List" <[email protected]> > Datum: Freitag, 20. März 2009, 12:54 > I would use "provided" which implies > that the target runtime will provide this if needed. > It's not needed, but the semantic should work. > "Provided" scoped dependencies are not transitively added to > packaging lifecycles like war and ear. > > Also, this is probably a maven-users question, not a > maven-developers list question. > > Christian. > > On 19-Mar-09, at 22:25 , Paul Benedict wrote: > > > Is there a way to bring in a library only for > compiling without making > > it part of the runtime (i.e., war dependency) or using > transitive > > exclusions? Java 5 has source-level annotations and > sometimes a > > dependency is only for compiling and has no runtime > dependency. Is a > > new scope needed for this? > > > > Paul > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > Christian Edward Gruber > e-mail: [email protected] > weblog: http://www.geekinasuit.com/ > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
