Actually, the <id></id> syntax is deprecated. It was the old way of doing things, and ultimately didn't provide the grouping mechanisms desired by some of the more popular framework projects (read Jelly, etc.). I think it will still work, but I don't know for how long, since I've heard rumblings about another overhaul to the dependency structures in the future. Using deprecation once removed is one thing, but two is pretty undesirable...
Cheers, John On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 14:40, Paul Libbrecht wrote: > > Jason van Zyl wrote: > > <dependency> > > <groupId>foo</groupId> > > <artifactId>bar</artifactId> > > <version>1.0</version> > > </dependency> > > > > Is the way to declare dependencies. > > Cool. > > Do I interpret correctly that: > > <dependency> > <id>blop</id> > <version>13.123231</version> > </dependency> > > Is a kind of shortcut for the following ? > > <dependency> > <groupId>blop</groupId> > <artifactId>blop</artifactId> > <version>13.123231</version> > </dependency> > > > at least it seems so in b10. > > Paul > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
