> > 2. I want to prepare a field for <<transitive>> dependencies. I think > that > > is should be controllable if given dependency is transitive or not. > > > > So I am proposing to use: > > > > <transitive>true</transitive> > > or > > <transitive>false</transitive> (default, can be skipped) > > As Ben noted, we may need to have dependencies with varying 'transitive' > status per kind. For example it is very common that a library is > required for compiling and running your project, but at the same time > only for running your project dependencies. Suppose we have: >
I don't understand. I see it this way - If we have: <dependency> <artifactId>foo</artifactId> <groupId>baa</groupId> <type>jar</type> <version>1.0</version> <kind>runtime</kind> <transitive>true</transitive> </dependency> or <dependency> <artifactId>foo</artifactId> <groupId>baa</groupId> <type>jar</type> <version>1.0</version> <kind>test</kind> <transitive>true</transitive> </dependency> in both cases we want to use all sub-dependencies (nested dependencies) of kind="runtime" required by "foo:baa:jar", as only runtime dependencies are interesting for other project. Other project don't need to know about compile or test dependencies. Am I right? Do you see some other scenario? Michal --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
