This is more for discussion, but why not nest the test Classpath dependencies inside the <unitTest> element of the POM? Also along those lines, why not use the <resources> element to nest the bundle/runtime dependencies?
This could eventually be used to create common unitTest.xml and/or resources.xml POMs that could be extended by projects independently of the common project.xml POM. Useful, I don't know, just some thoughts. When creating an EAR or a distribution ZIP, the <resources> element's dependencies would be used to create the bundles. Dependencies in the <resources> category would be moved to the 'target' build area (can the subdirectory be specified -- I'd really like to be able to have lib dir inside my EAR that contains the EJB Manifest dependencies), and thus included in the final bundle/artifact. They would also be included in the Classpath for runtime purposes, likely via the manifest. -----Original Message----- From: Michal Maczka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 8:00 AM To: 'Maven Users List' Subject: RE: [Proposla] changes in POM needed by new features of maven-new [w as:RE: Refining dependencies for test and non-test] > > 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]
