Thanks everyone for your suggestions. As I expected there is no way to do it, its just a matter of finding the better alternative then.
For me these alternatives are not so good. Perhaps when there is a LOT of common dependencies it makes sense to create a project for them. The "provided" does not apply since my dependency declaration is in my parent pom. Right now I just rather remove my dependencies from the parent pom. dahoffer wrote: > > Okay, I think I'll move them out of the parent. > > -Dave > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Nick Stolwijk > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Short of not doing it, as it is not "the right way", you can always >> put those dependencies on provided to not include them in any final >> artifacts. Maybe, somewhere down the line you will start experience >> other strange behaviour, like some dependencies which should be >> included aren't anymore. >> >> Ie. project A and B has the same dependency (call it X) and it is >> marked as provided by A, but not by B. When you start having B as a >> dependency of A, X will be marked by A as provided instead of >> included. >> >> Hth, >> >> Nick Stolwijk >> ~Java Developer~ >> >> Iprofs BV. >> Claus Sluterweg 125 >> 2012 WS Haarlem >> www.iprofs.nl >> >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 8:13 PM, David Hoffer <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I have a similar use case. In a multi-module build all but two of the >> > modules have the same base dependency so they are specified in the >> parent >> > pom. However I really don't want those dependencies in the two >> modules, >> so >> > how can I exclude them? >> > >> > (BTW, my use case is a Java project that has a couple of Flex modules, >> > obviously Flex doesn't need the otherwise global log4j dependency.) >> > >> > Short of not putting any dependencies in the parent how can I exclude >> them? >> > >> > -Dave >> > >> > On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Nick Stolwijk >> <[email protected] >> >wrote: >> > >> >> > Hi, I have a common POM to all my projects. >> >> Each project should have its own POM, with a parent pom hierarchy to >> >> avoid duplication, declare dependencyManagement and plugin >> >> versions/configuration. >> >> >> >> > The problem is that project X cannot use my common POM. >> >> Then let it have its own POM, like each project. >> >> >> >> > I don't think there is an easy solution, >> >> I don't understand your problem, maybe try to better describe the >> >> problem with some code examples (not the whole code!) >> >> >> >> >the closest I could find is to use dependencyManagement instead of >> the >> >> dependency itself. But that > would increase the amount of code. >> >> No, that would decrease the amount of code. You don't have to specify >> >> the version in each POM, but only in your company pom. It is not >> >> logical that each project has exactly the same set of dependencies. >> >> >> >> If you could try to explain what your current setup looks like, maybe >> >> we could give you some pointers how to improve it. >> >> >> >> Hth, >> >> >> >> Nick Stolwijk >> >> ~Java Developer~ >> >> >> >> Iprofs BV. >> >> Claus Sluterweg 125 >> >> 2012 WS Haarlem >> >> www.iprofs.nl >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 7:25 PM, icet <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Hi, I have a common POM to all my projects. >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> 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] >> >> > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Is-there-a-way-to-exclude-a-inherited-dependency--tp23296345p23321539.html Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
