Hi Gert, Yes it is exactly what I did to implements commands and other stuffs like re-branding... To avoid to import and define versions of each karaf dependencies one by one I follow the same solution than you. But I have other dependencies which have different dependency versions than the karaf ones.
Therefore that why I'm asking for a bom in karaf. Romain Le mercredi 30 mai 2012, Gert Vanthienen a écrit : > Romain, > > > In Apache ServiceMix, we are already using the current parent pom.xml > for Karaf in this way, cfr. > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/smx4/features/trunk/parent/pom.xml > - for all the Karaf stuff, we only have this one managed dependency > with 'import' scope and so far there have been no problems with that: > > <dependency> > <groupId>org.apache.karaf</groupId> > <artifactId>karaf</artifactId> > <version>${karaf.version}</version> > <type>pom</type> > <scope>import</scope> > </dependency> > > However, we might be a bit of a special case, because we directly > build on top of Karaf so we should not be using any other versions for > dependencies than the one that Karaf provides anyway. What > dependencies are you experiencing problems with? > > > Regards, > > Gert Vanthienen > ------------------------ > FuseSource > Web: http://fusesource.com > Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/ > > > On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 6:03 PM, Romain Gilles > <[email protected]<javascript:;>> > wrote: > > > > In fact when you use the scope import it automatically substitute the > > current import statement by all the dependencyManagement block of the > > pointed dependency (here karaf). > > Therefore as in your super pom you mix child dependency definitions and > > your third party dependencies then it is more hard to me to specify my > > dependencies on third parties because I have to take care of yours as > they > > are imported there is an ordering issue... > > So if you provide a bom I will get only your child projects in my > > dependency management and do my dependency management for my third > parties > > without take care of karaf's third parties. > > > > The may issue raise when you try to import 2 project that (i.e. karaf and > > another one) that does not have the same dependencies... (I mee in term > of > > versions). > > > > Do you see what I mean? > > > > Romain. > > > > Le mardi 29 mai 2012, Andreas Pieber a écrit : > > > > > Well, basically we provide a "regular super pom" [1] which specifies > > > most of our parent projects. I'm not quite sure which will be the > > > advantage of using the type bom over pom? > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > Andreas > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/karaf/blob/trunk/pom.xml > > > > > > On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Romain Gilles < > [email protected] <javascript:;><javascript:;>> > > > wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > I think it could be interesting to provide a bom as explained in > maven > > > > documentation: > > > > > > > > http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-dependency-mechanism.html > > > > I'm looking to use dependency management with import scope that > point on > > > > karaf and It will help me if you are providing a bom with only karaf > > > > projects in the dependency management and in a separate pom all the > third > > > > parties. > > > > > > > > I use to specify my maven configuration like this and it's works > fine and > > > > save me time. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > Romain. > > > >
