* Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotnicky@xxxxxxxxxx> [2010-08-23 07:58]: > Excerpts from Andrew Overholt's message of Mon Aug 16 15:33:26 +0200 2010: > > * Orion Poplawski <orion@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2010-08-13 16:49]: > > > On 08/13/2010 05:50 AM, Andrew Overholt wrote: > > > >>I would have thought that maven would complain when provided versions were not > > > >>compatible with requested versions. > > > > > > > >I'm pretty sure Deepak told me that our maven patches to do the mvn-jpp, > > > >look in /usr/share/java, etc. make it ignore versions (if you're using > > > >mvn-jpp and not just regular mvn). > > > > > > > >Andrew > > > > > > Intentional? Unavoidable? Bug? > > > > Intentional AFAIK. Deepak will be able to speak more authoritatively > > later in the week when he's around. > > I am no Deepak but in the meantime maybe I can shed some light on this > (or at least write what I got to know about maven over the course of > last few months). > > This is indeed intentional and reason is simple. Normally we have only > one version of each package installed. So there will probably never be > ant-1.7 and ant-1.8 installed simultaneously unless we decide it's > necessary to create package ant18 (or something similar). > > Therefore version checks are ignored when resolving maven dependencies > in jpp mode. Otherwise we would get tons of dependency issues > when compiling packages with maven. Most of the time this doesn't > cause compilation/runtime problems and if it does we update/backport > dependencies so that all Fedora packages are able to use same versions > of dependencies. This can sometimes be time-consuming (we have to > update packages to use new dependencies) but then we usually offer > these updates upstream and we don't have to do it again. > > Deepak can probably get more technical or correct my assumtions, but > this is my understanding of this situation so far. > Oops, didn't see this message when I replied to parent. Yes, you're absolutely correct. There is no technical limitation that required us to ignore versions. It was done on purpose for the reasons above. Cheers, Deepak > -- > Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotnicky@xxxxxxxxxx> > Associate Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno > > PGP: 71A1677C > Red Hat Inc. http://cz.redhat.com > -- > java-devel mailing list > java-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel -- java-devel mailing list java-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
