Sorry, I'm missing something. Why isn't B depending on A with "runtime" scope?
- Brett On 10/6/05, John Fallows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Suppose I have 3 Maven2 projects, A, B and C. > > A is self-contained. > B depends on A for-implementation-only. > C depends on B. > > My understanding of dependency scopes is that if C depends on B at > "compile" scope, then all of B's "compile" scope dependencies will > also become transitive "compile" scope dependencies of C. > > How do I prevent the classes in A from being visible during > compilation of C? Is this another usecase for "provided" scope? Or > does marking the A dependency as "provided" scope may have other > implications for project B? > > I am concerned about the potential to introduce an accidental direct > dependency from A to C. > > Ideally, I'd like project B to control the full set of compile > dependencies that are valid exports as transitive dependencies. > > Although I don't want to expose B's dependencies during compilation of > C, some of those dependencies will be necessary at runtime or during > unit test execution of C. > > Perhaps we could specify "compile" scope for C's dependency on project > B itself, but "test" scope (say) for all of project B's dependencies? > > Kind Regards, > John Fallows. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
