But I think that he wants it transitive, but only at runtime scope instead of compile time.
I also wondered a while ago if this was possible. It would be nice to keep clean projects clean. (As in, declared all compile time dependencies instead of relying on transitive compile time dependencies.) Would implementing this be an addition to the dependencies plugin? (crossing fingers, I guess this is done in Maven itself and not in a plugin). Nick Stolwijk ~~~ Try to leave this world a little better than you found it and, when your turn comes to die, you can die happy in feeling that at any rate you have not wasted your time but have done your best ~~~ Lord Baden-Powell On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Stephen Connolly < [email protected]> wrote: > So you could have scope=compile&optional=true (which means the dep is > non-transitive) > > On Wed 27 Dec 2017 at 00:26, Andy Feldman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Dec 26, 2017 11:34, "Stephen Connolly" <stephen.alan.connolly@gmail. > com > > > > > wrote: > > > > On Sun 24 Dec 2017 at 18:01, Andy Feldman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Assuming I have a dependency relationship of "my-project -> my-library > -> > > > upstream-library", with each dependency in compile scope, I know that > > > my-project transitively picks up a compile scope dependency on > > > upstream-library. Reading the documentation at > > > > > > https://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/ > introduction-to-dependency- > > mechanism.html > > <https://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/ > introduction-to-dependency-mechanism.html> > > > I see a note about this transitive dependency: > > > > > > "(*) Note: it is intended that this should be runtime scope instead, so > > > that all compile dependencies must be explicitly listed - however, > there > > is > > > the case where the library you depend on extends a class from another > > > library, forcing you to have available at compile time. For this > reason, > > > compile time dependencies remain as compile scope even when they are > > > transitive." > > > > > > If I know that my-library does not have this issue, is there any way to > > > declare the dependencies such that I can get the intended behavior? I > > want > > > upstream-library to be picked up as runtime scope for my-project, not > as > > > compile scope. > > > > > > Declare it with scope “runtime”? > > > > > > It needs to be compile scope in my-library since my-library uses classes > > from upstream-library. I'd like to avoid declaring upstream-library at > all > > in my-project if possible, since my-project has nothing to do with > > upstream-library. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > -- > > > Andy Feldman > > > > > -- > > Sent from my phone > > > -- > Sent from my phone >
