2009/3/21 sebb
> On 20/03/2009, Stuart McCulloch wrote:
> > 2009/3/20 sebb
> >
> >
> > > On 19/03/2009, Stephen Connolly
> wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > > (Note: true should have the same effect but I
> have
> > > > never quite got that to work the way it should)
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'm told
On 20/03/2009, Stuart McCulloch wrote:
> 2009/3/20 sebb
>
>
> > On 19/03/2009, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> >
>
> > > (Note: true should have the same effect but I have
> > > never quite got that to work the way it should)
> > >
> >
> > I'm told it doesn't, because the dpendency still ends
2009/3/20 sebb
> On 19/03/2009, Stephen Connolly wrote:
>
> > (Note: true should have the same effect but I have
> > never quite got that to work the way it should)
> >
>
> I'm told it doesn't, because the dpendency still ends up in OSGI bundles.
>
FYI, if you're talking about the maven-bundl
On 19/03/2009, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> 2009/3/19 sebb
>
> > On 19/03/2009, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> > > 2009/3/19 sebb
> > >
> > > > On 19/03/2009, Stephen Connolly
> > wrote:
> > > > > 2009/3/19 sebb
> > > > >
> > > > >
>
> > > > > > Can I get back to my original question, w
2009/3/19 sebb
> On 19/03/2009, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> > 2009/3/19 sebb
> >
> > > On 19/03/2009, Stephen Connolly
> wrote:
> > > > 2009/3/19 sebb
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Can I get back to my original question, which is:
> > > > >
> > > > > How does one express a dependency on a
On 19/03/2009, Dev at weitling wrote:
>
>
> sebb wrote:
> > On 19/03/2009, Stephen Connolly wrote:
>
> >> > > scope provided will do what you need afaik
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Yes, but then AFAIK the user has to download and install the jar
> >> > separately, which is a pain.
> >> >
sebb wrote:
> On 19/03/2009, Stephen Connolly wrote:
>> > > scope provided will do what you need afaik
>> > >
>> >
>> > Yes, but then AFAIK the user has to download and install the jar
>> > separately, which is a pain.
>> >
>>
>>
>> Nope
>>
>
> I think you meant "Yep..." as you se
On 19/03/2009, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> 2009/3/19 sebb
>
> > On 19/03/2009, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> > > 2009/3/19 sebb
> > >
> > >
> > > > On 19/03/2009, Rusty Wright wrote:
> > > > > Do the imports only have an effect at compile time? For example, if
> > you
> > > > > have
> >
2009/3/19 sebb
> On 19/03/2009, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> > 2009/3/19 sebb
> >
> >
> > > On 19/03/2009, Rusty Wright wrote:
> > > > Do the imports only have an effect at compile time? For example, if
> you
> > > > have
> > > >
> > > > package impl.zzz;
> > > >
> > > > import api.yy
On 19/03/2009, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> 2009/3/19 sebb
>
>
> > On 19/03/2009, Rusty Wright wrote:
> > > Do the imports only have an effect at compile time? For example, if you
> > > have
> > >
> > > package impl.zzz;
> > >
> > > import api.yyy.Yyy;
> > >
> > > public class Xyz i
2009/3/19 Stephen Connolly
> 2009/3/19 sebb
>
> > On 19/03/2009, Rusty Wright wrote:
> > > Do the imports only have an effect at compile time? For example, if
> you
> > > have
> > >
> > > package impl.zzz;
> > >
> > > import api.yyy.Yyy;
> > >
> > > public class Xyz implements Yyy {
> >
2009/3/19 sebb
> On 19/03/2009, Rusty Wright wrote:
> > Do the imports only have an effect at compile time? For example, if you
> > have
> >
> > package impl.zzz;
> >
> > import api.yyy.Yyy;
> >
> > public class Xyz implements Yyy {
> > }
> >
> > When you run the app the jvm won't need
On 19 Mar 2009, at 09:19, sebb wrote:
On 19/03/2009, Rusty Wright wrote:
Do the imports only have an effect at compile time? For example,
if you
have
package impl.zzz;
import api.yyy.Yyy;
public class Xyz implements Yyy {
}
When you run the app the jvm won't need to have the yyy.Yy
On 19/03/2009, Rusty Wright wrote:
> Do the imports only have an effect at compile time? For example, if you
> have
>
> package impl.zzz;
>
> import api.yyy.Yyy;
>
> public class Xyz implements Yyy {
> }
>
> When you run the app the jvm won't need to have the yyy.Yyy class
> available?
Do the imports only have an effect at compile time? For example, if you have
package impl.zzz;
import api.yyy.Yyy;
public class Xyz implements Yyy {
}
When you run the app the jvm won't need to have the yyy.Yyy class available?
Even if that's true it seems dubious to me because it seems
On 18/03/2009, sebb wrote:
> AIUI, "compile" scope means compile, test and run, and generates a
> transitive dependency.
>
> There are some dependencies that are compile-time only, for example
> annotations, and Java specification jars - i.e. API-only jars that
> have no implementation.
>
> W
AIUI, "compile" scope means compile, test and run, and generates a
transitive dependency.
There are some dependencies that are compile-time only, for example
annotations, and Java specification jars - i.e. API-only jars that
have no implementation.
What is the best way to define such a dependency
17 matches
Mail list logo
