> No, I don't think so. The properties were specifically introduced for > the benefit of plugins and while the properties could > certainly be used > the type element was specifically made for the handling of a type of > dependency.
Really? Is that how it is used? I thought it was used to specify what kind of artifact the dependency happens to be (jar, war, etc.). The "types" being talked about here are runtime vs. compile time. Different sort of "type" altogether. I guess that is more like "scope" than "type". --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
