Again, I totally agree for *normal* dependencies and again, I'm not
talking about those. I'm talking about the annotations only - which are
separate artifacts anyway.

Carsten


Oliver Lietz wrote
> On Monday 26 February 2018 12:51:14 Konrad Windszus wrote:
>> @Carsten:
>> Which dependency exactly to you want to declare now? The aggregate one for
>> annotations or the individual ones per annotation definition?
>>
>> But I rather tend to agree with Oli here. We should really force every
>> project to declare all(!) its dependencies. Having a dirty classpath for
>> non-OSGi modules just because you derive from parent does not seem right to
>> me. This should be a one time effort (given that OSGi does not rename the
>> artifacts again in the future).
> 
> And here is the example for dirty classpath:
> 
> https://github.com/apache/sling-org-apache-sling-jcr-contentloader/blob/master/pom.xml#L113
> 
> This is *NOT* a problem of Pax Exam.
> 
> Regards,
> O.
> 
>> Konrad
>>
>>> On 26. Feb 2018, at 12:44, Carsten Ziegeler <[email protected]> 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.
>>>
>>> Upgrading to the new parent pom is now really a pain.
>>>
>>> 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]

Reply via email to