I agree that you would need to add dependencies manually, but you have to do that anyway so that is not an additional burden. Having the minimal POM generated would probably eliminate about 75% of the POM problems.
The BEST way for this to happen is to have the VENDOR ship a POM with its libraries. Since that is not likely to ever happen, we will just need to muddle along. I would not want to decide within the Maven community on "official" group and artifact IDs because that starts to become a nightmare. You need to create a registry for the IDs, you need someone to maintain the registry, you need some sort of approval process to add entries to the registry, etc. The only libraries where this might start to make some sense is ones that are required to make plugins work. In this case, though, I would prefer that the plugin author documents the need to download the jar, where to find it, and how to install it locally so that the plugin works. -----Original Message----- From: Wendy Smoak [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 09:55 To: Maven Users List Subject: Re: Installing Commercial Jars and missing POM XML files From: "Allison, Bob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > A much better choice would be to allow install:install-file to > optionally create a POM for the file it is installing. It could create the minimal one that I'm doing manually now, but it couldn't know about the dependencies. In addition, it would be nice to "officially" decide on group and artifact IDs for these things, as well as version numbers (IBM tends to ship .jar files with no manifest so it's hard to tell what you've got.) -- Wendy --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]
