[Hawkular-dev] Importing JBoss BoMs to Hawkular Parent

[Peter Palaga]

Hi John and others,

First, I am not against including WildFly in some form. But I vote for 
the least possible set. jboss-javaee-7.0-with-all [1] is unnecessarily 
broad. Hibernate anyone?

Second, the possibility to run in a non-WF-like container is still 
somewhere in my consciousness. Importing wf BoM does not seem to be a 
step in that direction.

[1] 
http://central.maven.org/maven2/org/wildfly/bom/jboss-javaee-7.0-with-all/8.2.0.Final/jboss-javaee-7.0-with-all-8.2.0.Final.pom

Thanks,

Peter

On 02/16/2015 03:12 PM, John Mazzitelli wrote:
> My bad - it has been my intention to never touch the parent pom (or
> global maven stuff in general) anymore. I slipped up here. I was only
> trying to keep everyone on the same version as the Wildfly container
> we are embedding in (so, for example, the integration assembly will
> work). Didn't think it would be a problem since we are all running in
> Wildfly (at least, that is how the integration assembly that heiko
> had me create is working). Not sure how we can ensure we all use all
> the same versions as provided by the container we are in unless we
> pull in the BOM, but perhaps there is another way. (BTW: this doesn't
> pull in all those dependencies, it is just pulling in the dependency
> definitions and individual projects pull in whatever deps they want
> with the provided scope.



> But if there is a better way to ensure we
> keep on the same versions that the container provides, we can do
> that.
>
>> On 02/16/2015 02:37 PM, Peter Palaga wrote:
>>> Hi John,
>>>
>>> was there any discussion (that I may have missed during my PTO)
>>> around importing the jboss-javaee-7.0-with-all to parent? Could
>>> you please justify the idea once again for me?
>>>
>>> I must say I'd veto the change if I was at work. Here is why:
>>>
>>> (1) Tying to WildFly only. The change might be understood like
>>> this. I am not sure this was your intention, but please consider
>>> that importing another similar BoM (say EAP BoM) in paralel would
>>> in fact be extremely impractical, because of version conflicts.
>>>
>>> (2) Pulling in many artifacts we do not use, do not need, some of
>>> them maybe being implicitly unwanted ones. But having them in
>>> parent is actually legalizing them without any discussion. That
>>> is especially dangerous.
>>>
>>> (3) "Political" dependence on WildFly. WildFly may do changes at
>>> any time in their BoMs that may have bad consequences in
>>> Hawkular.
>>>
>>> The bottom line is that it would be much better to avoid
>>> situations this through discussing proposals prior to merging
>>> them in master. I have proposed explicit parent contribution
>>> rules in https://github.com/hawkular/hawkular-parent-pom/pull/13
>>> Feel free to comment on them.
>>> _______________________________________________ hawkular-dev
>>> mailing list hawkular-dev at lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
>>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________ hawkular-dev mailing
> list hawkular-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
>