Based on the description "Make 'optional' flag of a dependency manageable"
I would say -1 for this change. Or is this the answer to global excludes?
Even then I'm -1 and prefer extra elements in the model 5.
Maybe the description is misleading, because IIRC this is more about
transitive dependencies which were marked as optional. Those dependencies
should not end up in the resolution.
Give Christian Schulte the chance to clarify this again, based on 2 or 3
poms. Hopefully that explains it a bit more. Issue has reached TLDR status.
Robert
On Sun, 12 Jun 2016 13:38:04 +0200, Karl Heinz Marbaise
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
based on the feedback of the tests for current Maven 3.4.0-SNAPSHOT
testing I have taken a deeper look into some of the changes.
Based on the above issue we now have changed the behaviour of Maven
3.4.0 compared to 3.3.9 (and before).
It looks like this change breaks some builds...
So the question is:
* Is this the correct path we are going?
Handling test scope in a more strict way than before?
* I think we need to improve some of the docs to make it more clear
and of course add this into the release notes with
a red light in there...
WDYT ?
Kind regards
Karl Heinz
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
