As far as not including optional/scope: The way I formulated it, no they
aren't included. So? Why should they be: those aren't attributes of the
resource itself, but in how it is used. What's wrong with using the existing
way of configuring those? But if they need to be included, then include them
ent to
>
> http://myrepsoitory/org/springframework/spring-beans/2.5.6/spring-beans-2.5.6.jar
>
> Ralph
>
>
> On May 24, 2009, at 10:22 PM, bwtaylor wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm awaiting eagerly the Maven 3 introduction of attribute based
>> POMs called
>&
I'm awaiting eagerly the Maven 3 introduction of attribute based POMs called
for by MNG-3397. Still, I think a lot more can be done to improve, for lack
of a better term, the fluency maven's language.
One of the things that's always gnawed at me is the three separate
attributes needed to define
