I don't know if the karaf use is case is really valid (I'm still convinced a plugin configuraton is appropriate) but I like the dependency properties idea, structured as a properties addition to actual dependency element in POM to avoid wreaking havoc: we don't really know how people will use it, but this could give plugin developers flexibility to create new features Any strong objection? This could be a good time for the team to try to implement some POM additions and work on consequences: with a branch in git, regularly rebased, this should not represent too much efforts. Yes, I like it: instead of "any objection?", I prefer to ask "anybody with me?" Regards, Hervé
Le samedi 6 avril 2013 14:05:23 Andrei Pozolotin a écrit : Hervé here are few thoughts: 1) transitive concern is valid, but should not be enforced the way it is now. 2) user properties on dependencies are a valid feature to help plugin writers. 3) it would help to have standard api to extract these user properties from <dependency> 4) it could be implemented as optional xsd entry for <dependency>/<properties> where <properties> is a modello component identical to the <project>/<properties> Thank you, Andrei -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Dependency properties From: Hervé BOUTEMY <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: Fri 05 Apr 2013 12:37:09 AM CDT what about the shortcoming described in the "Why there are no dependency properties in Maven2" article? Notice we're back at a the POM model question (+ compatibility and so on) [1] But let's start with understanding the need and how it can scale or not Regards, Hervé [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Moving+forward+with+the+POM+data+model Le jeudi 4 avril 2013 12:54:50 Andrei Pozolotin a écrit : yes: http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVENUSER/FAQs-1#FAQs-1-Whytherearenodepend encypropertiesinMaven2 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
