pj.fanning wrote > Anyone know why we omit xmlsec dependency from the poi-ooxml pom file? > > If we don't want a full runtime/compile scope, could we add a > `provided`scope.
I've regarded the signing stuff as nice to have, as it is a rarely used feature. If we add xmlsec, also the additional bouncycastle dependencies should be added. I'm +0 to add the dependencies in the next release after 4.1.1 Andi -- Sent from: http://apache-poi.1045710.n5.nabble.com/POI-User-f2280730.html --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
