gnodet commented on issue #11391: URL: https://github.com/apache/maven/issues/11391#issuecomment-3492018877
> Having `directDependencyStrategy` at dependency level looks strange. > > WDYT of something like: > > * `dependencyVersionType`: `strict` (select exactly this version), `require` (accept this or later), `reject` > * `dependencyVersionMode`: `strict` (select exactly this version), `require` (accept this or later), `reject` > * `versionType`: `strict` (select exactly this version), `require` (accept this or later), `reject`. It sounds better for `<dependency>` tag, however having a top level `<project versionType="require">` would look misleading. > > <dependency> > <groupId>com.example</groupId> > <artifactId>lib-a</artifactId> > <version>1.0</version> > <dependencyVersionType>require</dependencyVersionType> > </dependency> > <dependency> > <groupId>com.example</groupId> > <artifactId>lib-a</artifactId> > <version>1.0</version> > <dependencyVersionMode>require</dependencyVersionMode> > </dependency> > <dependency> > <groupId>com.example</groupId> > <artifactId>lib-a</artifactId> > <version>1.0</version> > <versionType>require</versionType> > </dependency> What would be the behaviour of the `reject` value ? Act like `require`, but fail if the version would change ? I think we could have a top level `dependencyVersionType` on `project`, and a `versionType` on `dependency`. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
