Thanks for pointing that out. I think the latest fixed this. --Alex
> -----Original Message----- > From: Donal Lafferty [mailto:donal.laffe...@citrix.com] > Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 10:45 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] maven dependencies... > > Is it correct for dependencies to appear twice in the base pom.xml? > > E.g. mysql-connector-java > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Alex Huang [mailto:alex.hu...@citrix.com] > > Sent: 26 July 2013 11:10 PM > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > Subject: [DISCUSS] maven dependencies... > > > > Everyone, > > > > After looking around in the maven documentation, I realized the way we > > are specifying dependencies is not quite right for a large project such as > ours. > > > > Currently, almost every project declare their own dependencies and > > version number of the dependent jar. For those of us who are > > conscious of the version number properties declared in the cloudstack > > pom file, we follow that example but in many places, the version > > numbers are actually hard coded, probably because the writer is not aware > of this. > > > > Maven actually has a way to do this. In the master pom file, we can > > declare in the <dependencyManagment> tags all of the third party > > dependencies we need and their version numbers. And then each > > individual module can declare their dependency without version number, > > which defaults to the version declared by CloudStack's master pom. If > > a version number is declared in the module's pom, it overrides the > > master's version number but there's a warning about this override. > > > > Sounds good? If so I'll do a quick change to move it over. > > > > --Alex
