On Fri, 2004-01-09 at 12:21, Sonnek, Ryan wrote: > First off, I think this has been a great topic of discussion, and a lot of > very good ideas are coming out of it. As somewhat of a "test" to see what > will pan out as the best solution, how much work would it be to try out this > idea using the dependency properties? This would alleviate the need to make > changes to the POM (adding a kind element), and do a semi-formal trial of > the implementation. Would this be more or less work than actually changing > the POM and necessary plugins? > > <dependency> > <groupId>foo</groupId> > <artifactId>bar</artifactId> > <type>jar</type> > <version>1.2</version> > <properties> > <maven.dependency.type>runtime|compile|test</maven.dependency.type> > </properties> > <dependency> > > I think runtime should be the default property if none is specified. >
Myself, I honestly don't even see it as a type. I think separating dependencies you want to build with and ones you want to test with would suffice. Even for plugins, we have started putting them in the POM (which I honestly think is a bad thing) but by consistently naming plugin goals you can easily download plugins as the goal to be attained are requested. Where the goal name is <pluginId>:<goalName>, if the plugin isn't present then download it. -- jvz. Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://tambora.zenplex.org In short, man creates for himself a new religion of a rational and technical order to justify his work and to be justified in it. -- Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
