Using scope in dependencyManagement: good idea or bad?

2012-06-01 Thread Andreas Sewe
Hi all,

the subject say it all: Is declaring scopes in the dependencyManagement
section of your parent POM a good idea or a bad idea?

Best wishes,

Andreas

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org



Re: Using scope in dependencyManagement: good idea or bad?

2012-06-01 Thread Joachim Van der Auwera
In my experience a bad idea (bitten by this in the past). If the same 
dependency is mentioned in dependencyManagement in various places, then 
you may end up with the wrong scope.


I use dependencyManagement to specify the version and possibly 
exclusions. Scope is still managed in the dependency declaration itself.


Kind regards,
Joachim

On 01-06-12 15:05, Andreas Sewe wrote:

Hi all,

the subject say it all: Is declaring scopes in the dependencyManagement
section of your parent POM a good idea or a bad idea?

Best wishes,

Andreas

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org



Re: Using scope in dependencyManagement: good idea or bad?

2012-06-01 Thread Andreas Sewe
Joachim Van der Auwera wrote:
 In my experience a bad idea (bitten by this in the past). If the same
 dependency is mentioned in dependencyManagement in various places, then
 you may end up with the wrong scope.
 
 I use dependencyManagement to specify the version and possibly
 exclusions. Scope is still managed in the dependency declaration itself.

Makes sense. I was basically wondering if everyone considers this to
*always* be a bad idea or whether there are exceptions (like a
provided-scoped servlet-api, where a different scope might evne be
considered a bug).

Best wishes,

Andreas

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org



Re: Using scope in dependencyManagement: good idea or bad?

2012-06-01 Thread Wayne Fay
 the subject say it all: Is declaring scopes in the dependencyManagement
 section of your parent POM a good idea or a bad idea?

Unless you are employing an approach wherein all of those deps will be
scope provided [because you are providing them in the application
server's shared libs folder], I think it is a bad idea.

So I guess specifically for provided-scoped things, I support it, but
not for any others.

Wayne

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org



RE: Using scope in dependencyManagement: good idea or bad?

2012-06-01 Thread Thiessen, Todd (Todd)
+1 here. I find it valuable to changing scope to provided.

 -Original Message-
 From: Wayne Fay [mailto:wayne...@gmail.com]
 Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 10:53 AM
 To: Maven Users List
 Subject: Re: Using scope in dependencyManagement: good idea or bad?
 
  the subject say it all: Is declaring scopes in the
 dependencyManagement
  section of your parent POM a good idea or a bad idea?
 
 Unless you are employing an approach wherein all of those deps will be
 scope provided [because you are providing them in the application
 server's shared libs folder], I think it is a bad idea.
 
 So I guess specifically for provided-scoped things, I support it, but
 not for any others.
 
 Wayne
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org



Re: Using scope in dependencyManagement: good idea or bad?

2012-06-01 Thread Mark Struberg
I sometimes use this for libraries (like e.g. openwebbeans-impl) which I 
normally only have a runtime dependency for (generally defined via 
dependencyManagement). 


But in some cases you need to access some internal details. Usually I move 
those parts to some 'utility' module which then has a compile time dependency 
to the needed library.


LieGrue,
strub



- Original Message -
 From: Thiessen, Todd (Todd) tthies...@avaya.com
 To: Maven Users List users@maven.apache.org
 Cc: 
 Sent: Friday, June 1, 2012 5:20 PM
 Subject: RE: Using scope in dependencyManagement: good idea or bad?
 
 +1 here. I find it valuable to changing scope to provided.
 
  -Original Message-
  From: Wayne Fay [mailto:wayne...@gmail.com]
  Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 10:53 AM
  To: Maven Users List
  Subject: Re: Using scope in dependencyManagement: good idea or bad?
 
   the subject say it all: Is declaring scopes in the
  dependencyManagement
   section of your parent POM a good idea or a bad idea?
 
  Unless you are employing an approach wherein all of those deps will be
  scope provided [because you are providing them in the application
  server's shared libs folder], I think it is a bad idea.
 
  So I guess specifically for provided-scoped things, I support it, but
  not for any others.
 
  Wayne
 
  -
  To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
  For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
 
 
 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org



Re: Using scope in dependencyManagement: good idea or bad?

2012-06-01 Thread Mirko Friedenhagen
Hello,

we use this for dependencies which should go the test scope by default
as well. This prevents stuff like junit or mockito to be part of WARs,
e.g. The only drawback here are our integration test suites where a
lot of the code resides in src/main.

Same goes for logback-classic, which may be used in libraries in the
scope test but should be explicitely declared as either provided (by
our internal tomcat containers). As we use jcl-over-slf4j we define
commons-logging as provided by jcl-over-slf4j as well, so we do not
have to redeclare this in every application again.

Regards Mirko


On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 6:03 PM, Mark Struberg strub...@yahoo.de wrote:
 I sometimes use this for libraries (like e.g. openwebbeans-impl) which I 
 normally only have a runtime dependency for (generally defined via 
 dependencyManagement).


 But in some cases you need to access some internal details. Usually I move 
 those parts to some 'utility' module which then has a compile time dependency 
 to the needed library.


 LieGrue,
 strub



 - Original Message -
 From: Thiessen, Todd (Todd) tthies...@avaya.com
 To: Maven Users List users@maven.apache.org
 Cc:
 Sent: Friday, June 1, 2012 5:20 PM
 Subject: RE: Using scope in dependencyManagement: good idea or bad?

 +1 here. I find it valuable to changing scope to provided.

  -Original Message-
  From: Wayne Fay [mailto:wayne...@gmail.com]
  Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 10:53 AM
  To: Maven Users List
  Subject: Re: Using scope in dependencyManagement: good idea or bad?

   the subject say it all: Is declaring scopes in the
  dependencyManagement
   section of your parent POM a good idea or a bad idea?

  Unless you are employing an approach wherein all of those deps will be
  scope provided [because you are providing them in the application
  server's shared libs folder], I think it is a bad idea.

  So I guess specifically for provided-scoped things, I support it, but
  not for any others.

  Wayne

  -
  To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
  For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org