For third-party modules, not everyone wants to pull in all of the dependencies declared by a particular module. I personally don't want to pull a whole pile of junk jars from Maven, just because some projects list dozens of dependencies. For maven libs, I tend to just pull in the artifacts from the project itself. IvyRoundup has higher quality dependency lists, so there, I use transitive dependencies.
Thanks, --kirby -----Original Message----- From: Niklas Matthies [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 5:30 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Use of "master" conf On Thu 2009-06-11 at 11:59h, Michael Kebe wrote on ivy-user: > > When talking about module dependencies you have two view. > > 1) The view from your module (What does it need?). > > 2) The view to you module (Who needs it?). Certainly. > And the your "master" configuration can be used by other modules which > depend on your module, but without your dependencies. But for what purpose, without the dependencies? Given a dependency A->B, I don't think that A should depend on whether a particular artifact of that dependency is published by B or by some dependency of B. For example, B should be able to factor out some part of itself into a separate module and add a dependency to it, without breaking A. It's effectively an implementation detail of B whether its artifacts are published directly by B or rather by a dependency of B. Those "master" configurations expose this implementation aspect, and I wonder why this would be desirable. -- Niklas Matthies
