[Hawkular-dev] Parent POM and Wildfly BOM

[Stefan Negrea]

Peter, 

What would be a good argument to implement the removal of <scope>import</scope> as proposed by Thomas?


Thank you,
Stefan


----- Original Message -----
> From: "Peter Palaga" <ppalaga at redhat.com>
> To: "Discussions around Hawkular development" <hawkular-dev at lists.jboss.org>
> Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 11:50:31 AM
> Subject: Re: [Hawkular-dev] Parent POM and Wildfly BOM
> 
> On 2015-07-20 17:06, Thomas Segismont wrote:
> > Le 20/07/2015 16:15, Peter Palaga a écrit :
> >> 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
> >
> > "as long as" is the key. When we upgraded from Wildfly BOM version 8 to
> > 9.CR1, I spent half a day getting down to a build issue in Metrics,
> > where the rest-tests module suddenly stopped working, just because the
> > new BOM broke dependency resolution.
> 
> I can follow how hard it was to resolve the issue caused by WF BoM. But
> anyway, even if WF BoM was not imported in HK parent, are you not going
> to keep using the resteasy managed by WF BoM in rest-tests through
> keeping it imported somewhere in the rest-tests pom hierarchy?
> 
> You maybe prefer to manage the resteasy client version yourself? -
> because otherwise, I do not see how not having WF BoM imported in HK
> parent would improve something important for you.
> 
> >> 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.
> >
> > It boils down to control of dependency management. With the BOM auto
> > imported by the parent, we have to adapt to the Wildfly BOM choices.
> 
> Yes, that's true that we loose some control but the gain is that we do
> not need to manage the versions of artifacts they manage.
> 
> You claim that there are modules where it is harmful. But which ones? In
> ptrans, it is harmless, IMO (no dependency -> no problem). In
> rest-tests, you probably keep WF BoM included anyway, so removing the WF
> BoM include from HK Parent does not change anything. Is there any other
> module where the WF BoM include in Parent causes a problem?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -- P
> 
> > It
> > should not be like this.
> 
> 
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>