I've no issues with using excludes and not exclude of course the big issue I see is that all the goals in maven-dependency-plugin have different properties doing exactly the same thing!
I have to say I like your syntax, as gives a way to specify a complete set with one execution. the other syntaxes are not as flexible.... I guess I'm just looking for some "standard" way and a "standard name" for these "standard" ways -Stephen 2009/4/16 Mark Hobson <[email protected]>: > 2009/4/16 Stephen Connolly <[email protected]>: >> when writing a mojo that acts on dependencies.... which is the nicer >> way to handle includes and excludes >> dependency:purge-local-repository has a >> -Dexclude=groupId:artifactId,groupId:artifactId style >> while >> dependency:copy-dependencies has a -DexcludeGroupIds=groupId,groupId >> -DexcludeArtifactIds=artifactId,artifactId >> of course if there was no existing pattern i'd probably use the >> -Dexclude=g:a,g:a,g:a style only allowing wildcards >> e.g. -Dexclude=g1:*,g2:a2,*:a3,g4.*:a4-* >> but the fun there is shell escaping is a pain for cross-platform and >> Java expects quoting to behave differently >> Anyone??? > > I used the latter syntax for dependency:tree filtering, see: > > http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-dependency-plugin/examples/filtering-the-dependency-tree.html > > Although I went for 'excludes' rather than 'exclude'. I agree that > some consistency between plugins would be helpful. > > Mark > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
