I don't understand the difference between what you suggest here, Mark, and simply disabling transitive dependencies. Could you elaborate somewhat?
2014-04-07 3:41 GMT+02:00 Mark Derricutt <m...@talios.com>: > On 7 Apr 2014, at 12:32, Benson Margulies wrote: > > We then have other logical classpaths. . Something like javadoc should >> be able to define another named classpath structure; combining the >> dependencies of the plugin's implementation with dynamic code >> (doclets, whatever) seems like a category confusion to me. >> > > If we change/break this - can we PLEASE make the compilation path IGNORE > transitive dependencies of 'compile' dependencies - if I -need- it to > compile, -I- should depend on it up front. > > > Mark > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > -- -- +==============================+ | Bästa hälsningar, | [sw. "Best regards"] | | Lennart Jörelid | EAI Architect & Integrator | | jGuru Europe AB | Mölnlycke - Kista | | Email: l...@jguru.se | URL: www.jguru.se | Phone | (skype): jgurueurope | (intl): +46 708 507 603 | (domestic): 0708 - 507 603 +==============================+
