directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Emmanuel Lecharny" <>
Subject Re: Comments on Emmanuel's Maven Testing Thoughts
Date Sun, 03 Dec 2006 22:36:59 GMT
On 12/3/06, Ole Ersoy <> wrote:
> Emmanuel,
> I thought about your scenario a little more.
> Here's your scenario:
> -----------------------------------------
> Level0 -> L2 -> L3
> with a test in each level, and each test depends on
> a very specific version
> -----------------------------------------
> This is where I hung for a sec.
> >with a test in each level, and each test depends on
> >a very specific version.
> Then I thought about it like this:
> Challenge
>      We have L0 project
>      with a dependency in dependencyManagement
>      that has a version 2.1.1.


     A project A at L1 uses this dependency.

correct, so no need to declare the version, just declare the dependency in
L1 pom.xml

     Project B at L1 overrides this dependency
>      and sets the version to 3.2.

Ok, so you must declare the dependency AND the version in  B pom.xml

     Project C is a parent project and it
>      has two child projects, D and F.

I guess that you don't declare a dependencyManagment in C pom.xml file

     Project D needs version 3.3 of the
>      dependency.  Project F does not
>      want the dependency at all.
> Solution
>      Project D just overrides and puts in
>      version 3.3 like project B did.

Correct. And if project F is nut using the dependency, then  you don't
declare it in its pom.xml.

I assume you meant something like this?

more or less

I also assume that there are no tests in projects
> with packaging of type pom?

 Not usre I understand the question

If that's the case, then I think we should be fine.
> Have you had any issues with this type of structure?

I just try to figure out which structure works, in any case, and which is
not, and if there are some workaround. This is obviously a necessary task,
as, for instance, the eclipse plugin is not able to cope with this simple

> - Ole

Thanks !

View raw message