Stephen Connolly wrote: > On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 1:39 AM, Brett Porter > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> On 23/07/2008, at 1:34 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote: >> >> Ok, >>> >>> I have a package for the new 140 version as that's what I'm using >>> but what they have in central currently doesn't use classifiers >>> which is probably not so good. >>> >>> http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/bouncycastle/ >>> >>> So we can either: >>> >>> 1) Follow what they have their which is incorrect technically >>> 2) Deploy using classifiers as it probably should. Leave the old >>> version 130 there as it but also redeploy it using classifiers >>> >>> If we can decide I'll push version 140 into central. >>> >>> >> I think part of the problem is that there will be only one POM, but >> you need to express dependencies, and all those have classifiers. >> This is probably why I put them in in the form I did some time back. >> I'd prefer classifiers myself if there's some way we can think to >> work around that? >> >> - Brett > > > Is there any plans to fix this general problem? > > I.e. where the classifiers have different dependencies than the main > artifact. > > It would seem to be the use case that classifiers suggest using. > > i.e. a jdk1.4 classifier is not only compiled with 1.4 source, but has > additional dependencies because the 1.4 jre does not have all > the apis that > 1.5 has... so the jdk1.4 build should pull in those dependencies. > > I know one solution would be the schema-changing solution... > but what about > having poms with classifiers too? OK, so that would not get > picked up by > Maven <= 2.0.11... but still
Another prominent use case are ejb-client artifacts. They do normally not have the same dependencies as the EJB itself. - Jörg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
