[Hawkular-dev] Parent POM and Wildfly BOM

[Peter Palaga]

On 2015-07-20 14:36, Thomas Segismont wrote:
> Le 20/07/2015 12:40, Peter Palaga a écrit :
>> In my last message I claim to have shown that it is effectivelly 100% of
>> components. Which specific project "needs to escape" from your point of
>> view?
>
> 100% of components have at least one module to be deployed in Hawkular.
> But then there are modules meant to run out of Hawkular (ptrans in
> Metrics) or relevant to development only (rest-tests, load-testing,
> Openshift v3 tests).

Yes, I agree there exist maven modules inside HK componets projects that 
do not consume anything from WF BoM. ptrans is a good example of such 
one. But I am still failing to see what your proposal is going to 
improve in ptrans. WF BoM, regardless if it is imported in parent or 
not, has no influence on ptrans as long as you do not add a dependency 
on something from the WF BoM. ptrans does not depend on anything managed 
in WF BoM, hence there is no impact. The compile class path of ptrans 
and the resulting jar stay the same regardless if WF BoM is imported in 
HK parent or not. I see no impact at all.

I think I understand now how your proposal is supposed to work, but I 
fail to see why it is better than the present state.

Thanks,

-- P

>> Sorry, I must have overseen that you were asking WF team to remove the
>> scopes from their management. From your mails understood rather the
>> opposite, namely, that they added provided scope, that we need to adapt to.
>
> Not sure how that could have been made easier to read, my original email
> ends with "Going forward, I propose that we no longer "import" the BOM
> in Hawkular parent".
>
>> Is this where they did what you asked for?
>> https://github.com/wildfly/boms/commit/9e568fe4eb41d978c3181a90b5bb4d389ebcc019
>> - because that's where they removed provided from resteasy but all the
>> rest stood provided.
>
> Yes. There was an agreement that the changes made to the Resteasy
> section were wrong. They didn't change the rest because (I'm
> paraphrasing) the BOM is meant to be imported by WAR/JAR/EAR modules to
> be deployed to Wildfly.
>
>> And sorry, that I started to think about the real consequences only when
>> I saw your PR.
>
> OK. What's next? Are you going to reopen a PR in parent POM to remove
> the import scope?
> _______________________________________________
> hawkular-dev mailing list
> hawkular-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
>