----- Original Message -----
From: "Jason van Zyl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Hi,
>
> I just wanted to try to stimulate a discussion on any of the problems
> anyone has seen with the POM so far.
>
> I would like to cut another release but the next version I would like to
> promote a little more heavily so it would be nice to get something
> closer to a final structure.
>
> I think we've decided in IRC that:
>
> -> one source directory on all fronts
> -> remove the <type> element from the <dependency> element as the new
>    dep engine will deal with the computation of dependencies
> -> making the <jar> element in the <dependency> element optional
>    as it can be synthesized from the name and version of the dependency
>    and hopefully we won't need this at all eventually when all the jars
>    are named correctly.
>
> So if anyone else has any digs to make lets hear 'em :-)

If we're tinkering a little with the <dependency> element, I'd really like
it if we could introduce the idea of being dependent on another project,
rather than just a jar. My immediate use case is for a relative project
dependency within the same CVS image. So something like

<dependentProject>../../project.xml</dependentProject>

would do the trick. Then the POM stuff would need to load the dependent
project and import all its dependencies (unless they are locally
overloaded).

Though I dunno if this is straying into reactor territory; still haven't
grokked reactor yet.

James




_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to