I've no objection to reviewing provided in 2.1 - please make sure it is
in JIRA and/or the wiki roadmap. I'm not exactly sure if I have reasons
not to make it transitive (I don't think it will break things), it just
doesn't sit well with the view of what provided means - the dependency
shouldn't kn
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006, Stephen Duncan wrote:
(I'm cc-ing the dev list, maybe continue there?)
> It's Maven's decision: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-1978
>
> Brett still hasn't been convinced that provided status should be
> transitive. I don't have any particular use case to argue one way o
