On 26/03/07, Carlos Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
haven't tried, but should use them
i don't see the scope as the solution, is a workaround, it's not
designed to do that
Yep, I'd like to avoid mis-using the maven dependency system if pos.
BTW, what do you think about using the maven-dependency-plugin as
another way to wrap library artifacts? (for the non-recursive use-case)
there are two cases here:
- bundle = original library + OSGi manifest
I think this is the best solution, if you do it from the original
library pom, you just need the bundle:manifest goal, if you do it from
outside somehow you should deploy the dependencies section from the
pom in the original library instead of the current one.
Would this be in a separate 'wrap' goal - personally, I prefer plugins which
have many, simple goals that you can combine as necessary, rather than
one swiss-army-knife goal with lots of options.
- bundle = several libraries
this will require http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-2316 to be
implement first to list all the dependencies provided by the bundle
Do you have a timeline for MNG-2316?
On 3/25/07, Stuart McCulloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Interesting - btw, does it handle top-level dependencies with 'provided' scope
> as required by FELIX-262 (ie. to avoid the new artifact having transitive
deps)
>
> On 26/03/07, Carlos Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I commented in 255 about this, it'd be easy to add a parameter to
> > FELIX-199 bundleall goal to specify how deep to process the tree, you
> > could set it to 1 to bundle only the direct dependencies
> >
> > On 3/25/07, Stuart McCulloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > 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
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
> > No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
> > -- The Princess Bride
> >
>
>
> --
> Cheers, Stuart
>
--
I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
-- The Princess Bride
--
Cheers, Stuart
