commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <>
Subject Re: sanctioning commons-logging version "99.0-does-not-exist"
Date Thu, 14 May 2009 13:18:08 GMT
I would suggest bringing this up on the Maven dev list. I could see  
adding this as a feature to 3.0 to allow artifacts to be "redirected"  
to a replacement artifact.

On May 14, 2009, at 2:23 AM, Ceki Gulcu wrote:

> Hello all,
> A large number of Maven projects declare commons-logging as a
> dependency. Thus, if a developer wishes to use jcl-over-slf4j instead
> of commons-logging, he or she would need to declare a commons-logging
> exclusion in all of his/her dependencies which transitively depend on
> commons-logging. This can be an error prone process. To alleviate the
> pain, Erik van Oosten has developed a clever hack around this problem.
> See for details.
> The idea is to publish empty artifacts which supposedly fulfill
> dependencies for commons-logging without actually providing any
> classes (hence the empty artifacts).
> This approach works fine except that it requires the declaration of a
> new repository in the project's pom.xml file. Moreover, the durability
> of this repository is also questionable.
> Would the Apache Commons community, out of courtesy to developers,
> consent to commons-logging version "99.0-does-not-exist" to be
> published in the main maven repository?
> I understand that the Apache Commons has nothing to gain by
> sanctioning work done elsewhere. However, since the ASF is a
> non-profit organization I thought that my request might have a small
> chance of being accepted.
> Thank you for your response,
> -- 
> Ceki Gülcü
> Logback: The reliable, generic, fast and flexible logging framework  
> for Java.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message