On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 6:55 AM, Matthew Adams <[email protected]>wrote:
> Sheesh. Maybe it's worth documenting that explicitly. For whatever > reason, after reading the import documentation, I wouldn't > have thought to just add <type>pom</type> to my convenience pom. > Like I said, don't feel bad; it took me years before I realized this was possible. > > First, the dependencies are "one level down"--that is, you didn't include > > your pom artifact's dependencies directly, you included them > transitively. > > This might have a bearing on what versions of a given dependency "win" > in > > a complex inherited pom scenario. > > > > Ack. > This is not actually a big deal so long as you're remotely organized about things. Best, Laird -- http://about.me/lairdnelson
