On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 1:57 AM, Stephen Connolly <[email protected]> wrote: > On 26 May 2010 01:02, leonfranzen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> For now, my plan is to : >> 1. Build the DependencyNode tree with the maven DependencyTreeBuilder for >> the top-level POM >> 2. Traverse the tree and find each war Node >> 3. Serialize the node tree to disk >> 4. Separately run the dependency node serializer on each of the war >> projects >> found in step 2. >> 5. Deserialize all of the separate trees and assemble an aggregate >> dependency node tree. >> >> I'll wait to see if I'm missing some sort of filter configuration that's >> simply chucking out war dependency results, but I have a suspicion that >> Maven just doesn't resolve transitive war dependencies and that it would >> > > There is a components.xml that defines the war packaging. in that > components.xml it says that war is not a classpath dependency type (which is > correct because war files usually contain their dependencies), so the net > result is that when you build the classpath from the list of dependencies, > the transitive deps of war files will be ignored by design. But AFAIK > dependency:tree will show those deps >
It won't because it's relying on the core resolution to build the tree. Your paragraph above is otherwise exactly on the money. Maven is told not to resolve war dependencies transitively. > >> take a lot of work to make it do so. >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://old.nabble.com/Dependency-analysis-through-wars-tp28672012p28674916.html >> Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
