Yepp and following your argumentation then every project which starts to use R7 annotations can do so in its own pom.
Let's leave it the way it is. It would just have been nice to hear about these breaking changes in some way. But I guess I could have seen this coming by watching the commits. So all fine Carsten Oliver Lietz wrote > On Monday 26 February 2018 13:05:46 Carsten Ziegeler wrote: >> Well, it seems I'm the only one complaining anyway... >> >> TBH, I don't see a real advantage in having these things in the >> dependency management at all then. But I guess, it will just be me again... > > I expect to see an update at least for versioning annotations with R7, no? > > O. > >> Carsten >> >> >> Oliver Lietz wrote >> >>> On Monday 26 February 2018 12:44:53 Carsten Ziegeler wrote: >>>> Well, how many non OSGi modules do we have? I totally agree that it's >>>> better to not declare dependencies in the parent pom. But every rule has >>>> an exception, and I think the annotations (not the api) are an exception. >>> >>> The Maven and bnd plugins, Maven archetypes, the IDE modules and several >>> testing modules are non-OSGi – but I don't have any numbers. >>> >>>> Upgrading to the new parent pom is now really a pain. >>> >>> I don't think adding one or two dependencies is a big deal (correctness vs >>> convenience) and we have already updated several modules to Parent 33. >>> If others disagree we can add back those annotations with Parent 34. >>> >>> Regards, >>> O. >>> >>>> Regards >>>> Carsten >>>> >>>> Oliver Lietz wrote >>>> >>>>> On Monday 26 February 2018 12:15:16 Carsten Ziegeler wrote: >>>>>> Hi >>>>> >>>>> Hi Carsten, >>>>> >>>>>> it seems that updating to parent pom 33 is way harder than it should >>>>>> be. >>>>>> For an unknown reason the OSGi annotations are no longer declared as >>>>>> dependencies, requiring now each and every project to define >>>>>> them...which I think is really annoying. >>>>>> >>>>>> The change in question is referencing SLING-7384, but I can't find a >>>>>> discussion nor reason in there. So why has this been done? >>>>> >>>>> in my opinion dependencies should only be managed in parent and not >>>>> declared. We have several modules which are "not OSGi" and they inherit >>>>> those dependencies although not used at all. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> O. >>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> Carsten > -- Carsten Ziegeler Adobe Research Switzerland [email protected]
