maven-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mario Ivankovits <ma...@ops.co.at>
Subject Re: [RANT] This Maven thing is killing us....
Date Tue, 04 Jul 2006 14:20:19 GMT
Hi!
> If project A says it depends on B 1.0 and C says it depends on B 1.1,
> there's a conflict in Maven, Ant and anything you want to use, the
> difference is that Maven tries to do it for you, but you still can
> override that behaviour.
We also ended up putting our jars in svn again and using only system
jars with a path to the jar in our pom.
We have 50 direct dependencies, maintaining exclusion lists is a pain in
the a** as you have really spent a couple of hours to get everything
right again when you add a new dependency.

And the problem is not only a version number difference. Also a project
might decide to change its artifactId - or split into different smaller
pieces.
THAT was the real bummer for us.

Whats missing in pom.xml is something like: replaces and conflicts
So a artifact might say, ok, I "replace" any other artifact or I cant
work together "conflict" with one.

Say if xmlrpc decide to split into xmlrpc-common, xmlrpc-server,
xmlrpc-client, xmlrcp-all then it can say that it "conflict" with xmlrpc
- and for xmlrpc-all it can say that it "replace" xmlrpc.
Still, user intervention is required, but thats better than having the
same library on the path multiple times, just due to the fact that the
name differs.

Maybe also a "contains" would be nice, so xmlrpc-all can say it already
"contains" the server,client and common part.

But I have to admit, I dont want the one programming the dependency
solver ;-)

Ciao,
Mario


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@maven.apache.org


Mime
View raw message