Hi, On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Felix Meschberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 03.06.2008, 17:31 +0300 schrieb Jukka Zitting: >> Anyway, if your component depends for example on log4j 1.2.15, it's >> much better to explicitly exclude such transitive dependencies than to >> mark the entire log4j dependency as optional and then work around that >> in the bundle packaging. > > Right. But if I include the code into the bundle as and internal > implementation detail (which would be the case for log4j would I include > it in the osgi/log bundle for example), I would mark the dependency as > optional, because it is noone's business what the bundle internally uses > and hence the dependency is neither anybobdy's business.
The dependency is certainly Maven's business and, as discussed, also the business of any plugins or other tools that traverse the dependency tree. By marking the dependency as optional you're making things more complicated for those tools. What's the downside of not marking the dependency as optional? I.e. who's the someone who shouldn't know about the dependency? BR, Jukka Zitting
