Michael McCallum wrote on Tuesday, August 28, 2007 1:56 PM: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relation_composition > > group.id.composition.spring 2.0.6 > -> spring-beans 2.0.6 > -> spring-context 2.0.6 > > group.id.composition.spring.persistence 2.0.6 > ->group.id.composition.spring 2.0.6 > -> hibernate 3.1.3 > -> spring-hibernate3 > > group.id.artifact.a X > -> group.id.composition.spring.persistence [2.0, 2.1) > > group.id.artifact.b Y > -> group.id.composition.spring [2.0, 2.1) > > group.id.aggregation Z > -> group.id.artifact.b Y > -> group.id.artifact.a X > > when building aggregation - think war or ear - you get a graph with a > common composition element when it resolves you only get one of those > and the resultant transitions down the graph
OK. But this will not help you, if you include another artifact that depends transitively on Spring or Hibernate in different versions. And therefore we use a company or at least a master POM for a project with a dependencyManagement section. This way you can overwrite the versions of the transitive deps. > I will concede the logging artifacts as OT but you may see me on > commons later ;-) You're welcome :D - Jörg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
