Yes that'd be nice I imagine, to force use of 2.4. Separately, I made changes to use long[1] and double[1] as a simplistic version of MutableLong/MutableDouble. I don't entirely like it but it works fine and doesn't have any library dependency.
But, that really only dodges the problem that we have a lurking version conflict here so I'd rather not 'fix' it this way. But at least I can work again for now. On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 10:04 PM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> wrote: > Some use of 'excludes' is called for here. I'll have a look. > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Sean Owen <sro...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Two postscripts: >> >> Velocity 1.6.3 (latest) depends on 2.4, but isn't in Maven. >> >> The issue is using some methods on MutableLong/Double etc. in lang >> that aren't in 2.1. But if we're using those classes merely as a way >> to store a number as an object in a way that's efficient to change, >> then I submit that a plain old long[1] or double[1] is simpler and >> severs that dependency altogether. >> >> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Sean Owen <sro...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> I'm seeing a little problem in compiling now that only bites when >>> working through my IDE, but I still think it deserves a resolution: >>> >>> core uses commons-lang 2.4. core also depends on >>> collections-codegen-plugin, which depends on velocity 1.5, which >>> depends on commons-lang 2.1. My IDE takes 2.1 somehow and fails though >>> the main build doesn't seem to mind. >>> >>> Is there a way to tell Maven, somehow, to definitely use 2.4? because >>> I believe velocity would work with that too. >>> Alternatively it's just a little surgery to make us compatible back to >>> 2.1, but, would rather not do so I guess in principle. >>> >> >
