I like the syntax that you chose using "includes" and "excludes" containing a
comma separated list of "[groupId]:[artifactId]:[type]:[version]". To me this
is more intuitive than separate fields for artifactIds, groupIds, and classifiers.
Although I would maybe add [classifier] also.
Mark Hobson wrote:
2009/4/16 Stephen Connolly <[email protected]>:
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
The dependency:tree goal was written independently from the rest of
the maven-dependency-plugin and added later, hence the discrepancy.
I'm obviously biased as I also prefer my syntax :) Perhaps see what
everyone else thinks and then we can move to a standard syntax.
Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
