I added my own.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Jeremy Thomerson <[email protected]> wrote: > Did you actually add an explicit dependency on a newer version, or is this > just that Wicket and Hibernate both had dependencies, but on different > versions? > > -- > Jeremy Thomerson > http://www.wickettraining.com > > > > On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 7:53 AM, James Carman > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> I don't know. That's the weird thing! I use Maven regularly and >> usually if it sees that you specify a newer version of a library than >> one of your dependencies declares, it will use that version. But, >> with that new Hibernate stuff, I saw two different versions showing up >> on my classpath if I didn't do exclusions. Very weird indeed. I >> haven't looked at the hibernate poms to see if they're doing something >> different now or not. Again, I had to back out the hibernate stuff >> for other reasons, so I don't have the environment set up right now to >> investigate further, but perhaps I can try it on one of my "pet" >> projects. >> >> On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 7:17 AM, Max Bowsher <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On 01/05/10 18:06, James Carman wrote: >> >> Can we move the SLF4J dependency from the parent pom.xml file to the >> >> wicket module's pom.xml file? Since it's in the root, I have to do >> >> excludes for each submodule from wicket (extensions, datetime, etc.) >> >> to tell maven not to use the version of SLF4J that they specify. >> > >> > Why do you need to use an exclusion, instead of merely telling Maven >> > which version you actually want to use? >> > >> > Max. >> > >> >
