www-repository mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Carlos Sanchez" <car...@apache.org>
Subject Re: wtf happened to log4j?
Date Thu, 29 Nov 2007 02:36:43 GMT
I'd say "optional", provided should be used in very specific cases

On Nov 28, 2007 5:06 AM, Curt Arnold <carnold@apache.org> wrote:
> We were quickly notified that updating log4j 1.2.15 had the
> unfortunate side effect of propagating non-redistributable artifacts
> to dependent projects.   Those artifacts are necessary to build log4j,
> but not necessary to run log4j unless you use specific features.
> We've marked those dependencies as optional in our SVN HEAD's pom.xml (http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/logging/log4j/trunk/pom.xml
> ) and expect to push out a 1.2.16 in the near future.
> There was a suggestion to scope the dependencies as "provided" since
> if those features were used, it would generally (but not exclusively)
> be in a J2EE environment where the dependencies would be part of the
> J2EE classpath.  However, that seems wrong based on my reading.
> If you have any advice on the log4j 1.2.16 pom.xml, please post to
> log4j-dev.  Thanks.

I could give you my word as a Spaniard.
No good. I've known too many Spaniards.
                             -- The Princess Bride

View raw message