Cheers :) 2009/2/17 Paul Hammant <[email protected]>
> OK, take a look at http://fisheye.codehaus.org/changelog/qdox/?cs=555 > Regards, > > - Paul > > On Feb 17, 2009, at 1:06 PM, Robert Scholte wrote: > > I have to agree with joseph. An example for provided is the servlet-api: > you need it for both compilation and runtime, but it won't be included. > In this case it's pretty rare you need the dependency at runtime, so > optional is a better choice. (provided suggests some jvm already has the > jar) > > And the jmock is only required during test, doesn't it? So let's just give > it the test-scope. > > -Robert > > ------------------------------ > Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 19:47:37 +0100 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [qdox-dev] pom of qdox > > That will work, but isn't semantically correct; I think > <scope>compile</scope> > <optional>true</optional> > would be more correct. But then again, I'm just nitpicking, I don't think > it makes any real difference. > > -g > > > 2009/2/17 Paul Hammant <[email protected]> > > I've changed three scopes to 'provided'. It means that they won't cascade > to Maven user's deps transitively. It also blurs the distinction between > 'test' and 'compile'. > Thoughts? > > Regards, > > - Paul > > On Feb 17, 2009, at 9:32 AM, Grégory Joseph wrote: > > I think they're used by xdoclet/generama, for instance (which in turn > provide abstract testcase for their plugins so they can check generated code > against expected code, and ant tasks to generate some code).These > dependencies (ant and junit) should probably be marked as optional, then. > > Just my 2 unverified cents, > > -g > > 2009/2/17 Robert Scholte <[email protected]> > > Last time I noticed that the dependencies are missing their scope. > > Both junit and jmock should have the test-scope. > > It seems there's some lost class in the sourcefolder, which depends on > junit, namely com.thoughtworks.qdox.junit.APITestCase > there are no references to this class, so I would nominate it for deletion. > > And I guess the ant-dependency should be at least 1.5.1 and optional > But wait a minute... isn't com.thoughtworks.qdox.ant.AbstractQdoxTask just > as lost? Ok, it has some tests, but that's the only usage I can find. > another nomination? > > regards, > > Robert > > ------------------------------ > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! MSN Messenger > > > > > > ------------------------------ > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! MSN > Messenger<http://clk.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/> > > >
