Re: Versions in dependencyManagement vs dependency?
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Anders Hammar and...@hammar.net wrote: Be aware that you're talking of two different strategies. Using a pom artifact as a dependency and using import scope to import depMgmt declared in another pom. Two different things! Yes, that's exactly my point. I've seen import scope documented before, but I've not seen simply having a dependency of type pom documented anywhere on the Maven site. Thanks, Laird
Versions in dependencyManagement vs dependency?
Got a bit of an architecture/style question here. I'm familiar with the use of the dependencyManagement block in a parent pom to fix versions of or otherwise configure a dependency. However, except for cases which need it (for example, when transitive dependencies are otherwise pulling in two versions of the same JAR) I typically don't put versions there, but instead in the pom where I'm declaring the dependency itself. I think this is pretty much SOP, if I'm not mistaken. Now someone on my team has asked why we shouldn't put ALL versions in the parent POM (in dependencyManagement blocks, so as not to create additional dependencies). While my initial gut reaction is that's a bad idea (since dependency info would then be in at least two places) I thought I'd see if anyone else there has tried this and has any pros or cons around the practice. Thanks - Don
Re: Versions in dependencyManagement vs dependency?
it depends on how often you update versions and how often you will release the parent. if you update versions very often, but you don't want to release the parent very often, then don't do it. what I tend to do is aggregate the version info as high up in each independently releasable tree. On 29 March 2011 15:13, Brinker, Don-NONEMP dbrin...@collegeboard.org wrote: Got a bit of an architecture/style question here. I'm familiar with the use of the dependencyManagement block in a parent pom to fix versions of or otherwise configure a dependency. However, except for cases which need it (for example, when transitive dependencies are otherwise pulling in two versions of the same JAR) I typically don't put versions there, but instead in the pom where I'm declaring the dependency itself. I think this is pretty much SOP, if I'm not mistaken. Now someone on my team has asked why we shouldn't put ALL versions in the parent POM (in dependencyManagement blocks, so as not to create additional dependencies). While my initial gut reaction is that's a bad idea (since dependency info would then be in at least two places) I thought I'd see if anyone else there has tried this and has any pros or cons around the practice. Thanks - Don - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Versions in dependencyManagement vs dependency?
Well, we put all the versions in the parent pom. It makes the versions easy to change from the project's perspective. You don't have to browse through many files to see where the dependency is declared. Also, two or more of the sub-project may have a dependency on a same artifact, and if you put the version in the parent pom, you have the version in only one place. -- View this message in context: http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Versions-in-dependencyManagement-vs-dependency-tp4269473p4269530.html Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Versions in dependencyManagement vs dependency?
juranta wrote: Well, we put all the versions in the parent pom. It makes the versions easy to change from the project's perspective. You don't have to browse through many files to see where the dependency is declared. Also, two or more of the sub-project may have a dependency on a same artifact, and if you put the version in the parent pom, you have the version in only one place. Same here. No version info in explicit dependencies. - Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Versions in dependencyManagement vs dependency?
We follow Stephen's path but build aggregation poms that only contain libraries so that our project POMs only depend on our libraries. For example if the war file needs the Apache Commons that we support in our development environment, the project will depend on the current version of ours-lib-commons.pom. This reduces the project poms to 5-6 dependencies that are almost always the same so it is easy to start a new WAR project. This provides central control (only 3 developers) over what versions are used and the JAR file produced by the library pom is shared in Tomcat and has provided scope in the WAR project so the war files are really small with only our code and WEB-INF files included. This makes the developers life easy since the versions of libraries are settled once for each release and are not a PITA for the programmer. This saves a lot of time when building and deploying since we use web services and lots of other big tool kits that can take a 20K of classes, jsps, etc. and turn it into a 20M monster. We have about 10 library POMs and over 50 war file POMs. Ron On 29/03/2011 12:39 PM, Jörg Schaible wrote: juranta wrote: Well, we put all the versions in the parent pom. It makes the versions easy to change from the project's perspective. You don't have to browse through many files to see where the dependency is declared. Also, two or more of the sub-project may have a dependency on a same artifact, and if you put the version in the parent pom, you have the version in only one place. Same here. No version info in explicit dependencies. - Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Versions in dependencyManagement vs dependency?
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Ron Wheeler rwhee...@artifact-software.com wrote: We follow Stephen's path but build aggregation poms that only contain libraries so that our project POMs only depend on our libraries. For example if the war file needs the Apache Commons that we support in our development environment, the project will depend on the current version of ours-lib-commons.pom. Just out of curiosity, where is it written down that one can depend on an artifact of type pom? I've always been curious about this. L
Re: Versions in dependencyManagement vs dependency?
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Laird Nelson ljnel...@gmail.com wrote: Just out of curiosity, where is it written down that one can depend on an artifact of type pom? I've always been curious about this. Are you asking about import scope? http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-dependency-mechanism.html#Importing_Dependencies -- Wendy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Versions in dependencyManagement vs dependency?
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Wendy Smoak wsm...@gmail.com wrote: Are you asking about import scope? http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-dependency-mechanism.html#Importing_Dependencies I guess I am; is it required that when you're using import scope that the type element be set to pom? I assume, therefore, that type pom is not applicable anywhere else except (a) inside a dependency management entry that (b) has scope import? L
Re: Versions in dependencyManagement vs dependency?
On 29/03/2011 1:59 PM, Laird Nelson wrote: On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Ron Wheelerrwhee...@artifact-software.com wrote: We follow Stephen's path but build aggregation poms that only contain libraries so that our project POMs only depend on our libraries. For example if the war file needs the Apache Commons that we support in our development environment, the project will depend on the current version of ours-lib-commons.pom. Just out of curiosity, where is it written down that one can depend on an artifact of type pom? I've always been curious about this. L In the case that I described, the actual dependency is on the JAR. The aggregation POM produces a JAR that is deployed in our Nexus and is available like any other third party library and installed in Tomcat's /lib as part of the application upgrade. In the days of cloud servers, a Tomcat dedicated to one application is pretty easy to defend if anyone questions the possibility of library conflicts between applications. Sorry for the confusion. A bit of sloppy writing. I will try to defend myself by characterizing my description as over abstracted. We only use scope compile or provided. Ron - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Versions in dependencyManagement vs dependency?
Tim talks about this in this blog post: http://www.sonatype.com/people/2009/10/maven-tips-and-tricks-grouping-dependencies/ A pom artifact is an artifact like all others...it's just that the artifact is the pom itself. /Anders On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 19:59, Laird Nelson ljnel...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Ron Wheeler rwhee...@artifact-software.com wrote: We follow Stephen's path but build aggregation poms that only contain libraries so that our project POMs only depend on our libraries. For example if the war file needs the Apache Commons that we support in our development environment, the project will depend on the current version of ours-lib-commons.pom. Just out of curiosity, where is it written down that one can depend on an artifact of type pom? I've always been curious about this. L
Re: Versions in dependencyManagement vs dependency?
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Anders Hammar and...@hammar.net wrote: Tim talks about this in this blog post: http://www.sonatype.com/people/2009/10/maven-tips-and-tricks-grouping-dependencies/ Thank you, yes, this is the first I've seen this documented. So that seems like you don't need scopeimport/scope in order to depend on an artifact with typepom/type. This is very useful to see. I wish it were documented more prominently. Best, Laird
Re: Versions in dependencyManagement vs dependency?
Be aware that you're talking of two different strategies. Using a pom artifact as a dependency and using import scope to import depMgmt declared in another pom. Two different things! /Anders On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 22:18, Laird Nelson ljnel...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Anders Hammar and...@hammar.net wrote: Tim talks about this in this blog post: http://www.sonatype.com/people/2009/10/maven-tips-and-tricks-grouping-dependencies/ Thank you, yes, this is the first I've seen this documented. So that seems like you don't need scopeimport/scope in order to depend on an artifact with typepom/type. This is very useful to see. I wish it were documented more prominently. Best, Laird
