[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MDEP-885?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17768145#comment-17768145
]
Delany commented on MDEP-885:
-----------------------------
If Maven were opinionated it wouldn't even allow used-undeclared,
unused-undeclared. And I might add that if Maven were strict from the beginning
the project I'm working on would never have been allowed to deteriorate to the
state that it is in.
The whole purpose of this goal, it seems, is to aid in tightening up what Maven
allows by design. Who knows what situations people might be trying to crawl out
from? My idiosyncratic setup is NOT fine. But I cant fix it all in one go.
Of course we all want to avoid unnecessary work, so you ask for a use case.
What I'm saying is: allow full freedom to arbitrarily select artifacts and you
will never have to consider another use case for this type of issue.
I don't really understand what else could be the obstacle. IgnoredDependencies
is the same as an excludes filter, and includes just lets you do its
complement. What is the use case for an IgnoredDependencies parameter?
> Introduce artifactSets in analyze
> ---------------------------------
>
> Key: MDEP-885
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MDEP-885
> Project: Maven Dependency Plugin
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: analyze-only
> Affects Versions: 3.6.0
> Reporter: Delany
> Assignee: Elliotte Rusty Harold
> Priority: Major
>
> As in MDEP-210, in my project all third-party artifacts, including their
> transitives, must be specified as direct dependencies. What happens is that
> these transitives get flagged as unused. I want the rule to consider only
> dependencies with a groupId identifying the artifacts I produce.
> None of the current options allow this. Please add include/exclude parameters
> so I can filter by Maven coordinates.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
