I don't think provided would be a good idea.
If someone don't use tomahawk with myfaces-api and myfaces-impl.
It would be easier to exclude myfaces-api and myfaces-impl and add a
dependency to the RI. On the other side it would be painful for the
normal user, the normal user would expect a compile dependency to
myfaces-imp and myfaces-api.
Adam Winer schrieb:
On 1/5/06, Sean Schofield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There are transitive dependencies between commons and impl, or commons
and tomahawk.
Tomahawk actually has a dependency on api (a compile time one.) If
you were to build tomahawk using maven you would need it. If you were
to use tomahawk with your own project you would not need it. I'm
thinking the "provided" scope would help us here?
Yep, "provided" would be a good fit here.
Anything that's a compile time dependency of library Foo
where a user of Foo is responsible for supplying that dependency
should be declared "provided".
-- Adam
--
Dipl.-Ing. Bernd Bohmann - Atanion GmbH - Software Development
Bismarckstr. 13, 26122 Oldenburg, http://www.atanion.com
phone: +49 441 4082312, mobile: +49 173 8839471, fax: +49 441 4082333
