Open rsvoboda opened 2 years ago
/cc @geoand, @iocanel
/cc @aloubyansky @maxandersen
FYI @gsmet. I think the reason to have them in the extension POM files is to satisfy the enforcer plugin building those extension modules.
We need to be extremely careful about that. I know I had some weird issues when exclusions were partly in the BOM and partly in the dependency declaration. With Maven doing some crazy things and ignoring some of them in some situations, not all.
If we play with that, we will need to check things very cautiously (and I won't be the one doing it).
I'd like to point out that we (Camel Quarkus) started excluding all banned artifacts in the BOM a couple of months ago and it works quite well. I have not seen any issues like you mention. Our flattener mojo checks this and fails when an exclusion is missing somewhere. ATM, the mojo is reading the banned deps from our top pom.xml . That's basically a manual copy from quarkus-build-parent. Having a banned list as an artifact (a.k.a. #24880) from Quarkus core would be nice.
Describe the bug
javax.annotation excludes spreaded across multiple modules instead of centralized approach in BOM
Noticed this when preparing https://github.com/quarkusio/quarkus/pull/26347
I think the excludes should be managed in the BOM and not across individual extensions
javax.annotation excludes outside the BOM
Expected behavior
javax.annotation spreaded centralized in BOM
Actual behavior
javax.annotation excludes spreaded across multiple modules instead of centralized approach in BOM
How to Reproduce?
No response
Output of
uname -a
orver
No response
Output of
java -version
No response
GraalVM version (if different from Java)
No response
Quarkus version or git rev
Quarkus main
Build tool (ie. output of
mvnw --version
orgradlew --version
)No response
Additional information
No response