Hi Alin, Thanks for the comments - I'm not completely adverse to the idea of handling the transitive dependency issue inside the plugin, just questioning the benefit given there's (imho) a workable solution.
I'm also worried that changing the way the bundle pulls in artifacts might break other users. I believe this issue is only for the 'wrapping jar' case - is that right? Anyway, this is just my own opinion - looking forward to hearing more views :) Cheers, Stuart On 26/03/07, Alin Dreghiciu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Nice summary Stuart, I also posted some comments on FELIX-262 and FELIX-255. Alin Dreghiciu On 3/25/07, Stuart McCulloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi folks, > > Currently there are 8 open issues for the maven-bundle-plugin. I've > written up a > short one-line status for each of them (inc. # of votes, whether a patch > exists) > along with a suggested course of action in another table. (see attached > file) > > The suggested actions are all MHO, so apologies if I've misrepresented any > of the issues, or the patches. Please post a follow-up message pointing > out > any mistakes, updates or alternative suggestions. > > Basically I recommend looking at FELIX-199 first, as it also solves > several > other issues. The one thorny area is over maven dependencies: whether to > get the user to handle this outside in the pom with other plugins, or to > add > options to the bundle plugin for the sake of convenience (FELIX-255/262). > > -- > Cheers, Stuart > >
-- Cheers, Stuart
