I'm generally in favour now, but there are a couple of things I'd
still like to explore first, please bear with me.
Having had the chance to review the new behaviour, I can't see any
problems with applying it to current builds - I would expect it
extremely rare to see a managed dependency in a build that also comes
through transitively at present (and if so, it's probably the version
you want). So I'm happy to make that exception to include it in a
point release given the 2.1 code is alpha.
Back tracking just a little bit, though - I want to validate that
this is the correct implementation method.
- is overloading the meaning of dependency management a problem? I'm
almost certain we considered doing this around about the 2.0-alphas
and it was ruled out, though personally I've always thought depMgmt
should have behaved this way.
- is this covering up for a lack of something in the dependency
mechanism itself? eg., if we add proper conflict resolution and
different selection mechanisms, would this be needed/removed?
My impression is that we'd still want this in the future, but
improvements to the mechanism itself should reduce the need for it in
projects. I just thought it was worth considering, since I thought
it'd been ruled out for other reasons in the past. But other than
that, I'm happy with it going in now.
As a last point, I'm a little confused about what we are actually
voting on - as far as I can tell this is already the default
behaviour on the branch? I must be missing something - what needs to
be done?
Thanks for getting this done folks - it certainly has been a pest.
- Brett
On 17/03/2007, at 10:38 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
Mike,
Good plan. This is exactly what I was getting at - but I thought we
could already do this from the branch that the feature was
implemented on? That's what I was intending to use.
I'm obviously having trouble grokking the actual implications of
this - I was getting the clear impression this was going to break
builds, but it seems that may not be the case from the ensuing
discussion. So all I really want to do is play with it and see for
myself at this point. I have some time later today/tomorrow.
- Brett
On 17/03/2007, at 7:35 AM, Mike Perham wrote:
The key question to me is: are existing 2.0.5 builds going to be
better or worse after this upgrade? I would prefer to see less
speculation and more bits. Put out a Maven 2.0.6 snapshot that
people
can try with their project and get reports from the people in this
thread. If no one has problems, this discussion becomes a lot
shorter. If they do have problems, at least we have specific
examples
to discuss.
mike
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
