My take is that if something is in the parent/BOM that means "free
buffet, use it without any question".
So this raise the question of:
- Have we moved away from "usable in a non full-JavaEE environment" ? (
)
- Do we tie Hawkular and its components to Wildfly ? (RHQ Metrics used
to be embedded-able as a war within Karaf (without pulling tons of
dependencies))
(note that there are flavours in the answer such as wildfly-core).
If so we should explicitly say so and check the consequences.
Thomas
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(a)lists.jboss.org
>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
hawkular-dev mailing list
hawkular-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev