On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 13, 2015 3:25 AM, "Stephen Connolly" > <stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> <type>pom</type>? > > > 1. The feature descriptor is <type>xml</type> > > 2. I believe that this still adds transitive dependencies to the dependency > graph.
How about the following proposition: of the type is not jar, nothing goes onto the classpath? Not the thing, not its dependencies? > > > >> >> >> On Saturday 12 December 2015, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Sometimes, we want to declare a dependency without changing a classpath. >> > >> > Project A builds an OSGi bundle and a Karaf feature (classifier >> > 'feature', type 'xml'). >> > >> > Project B wants to consume the feature. it wants to declare the >> > feature descriptor as a dependency, to (a) ensure reactor order, and >> > (b) make the dependency information available to plugins. >> > >> > But it does _not_ want A's OSGi bundle and it's dependencies in the >> > classpath. >> > >> > The only way out is to exclude them, one-by-one. And when someone adds >> > a dependency to A, you have to maintain the exclusion list. >> > >> > Another example is the tomcat plugin: it needs wars as dependencies, >> > and similarly it needs to avoid having their dependencies in the >> > classpath. >> > >> > To me, this calls out for another scope. >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org <javascript:;> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > <javascript:;> >> > >> > >> >> -- >> Sent from my phone --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
