Re: Is it possible to exclude a transitive dependency from all my dependencies?

[Nicolas Lalevée <ni...@hibnet.org>]

On mercredi 21 janvier 2009 10:30:19 Kent Larsson wrote:
> A lot of libraries use the Jakarta Commons Logging (JCL) bridge and in each
> case I want to exclude it as I will be using Simple Logging For Java (SL4J)
> which has ways to implement the JCL so that I can use one logging system
> only if I want to, and I do.
>
> I'm wondering if I have to write one exclude="" for each <dependency> or if
> there is an easier way to just define that I never in any case want the JCL
> dependency? (It would make a cleaner ivy.xml)

yes you can do it globally, see:
http://ant.apache.org/ivy/history/latest-milestone/ivyfile/exclude.html

Nicolas

Re: Is it possible to exclude a transitive dependency from all my dependencies?

[Kent Larsson <ke...@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 10:55 AM, Nicolas Lalevée <
nicolas.lalevee@hibnet.org> wrote:

> On mercredi 21 janvier 2009 10:30:19 Kent Larsson wrote:
> > A lot of libraries use the Jakarta Commons Logging (JCL) bridge and in
> each
> > case I want to exclude it as I will be using Simple Logging For Java
> (SL4J)
> > which has ways to implement the JCL so that I can use one logging system
> > only if I want to, and I do.
> >
> > I'm wondering if I have to write one exclude="" for each <dependency> or
> if
> > there is an easier way to just define that I never in any case want the
> JCL
> > dependency? (It would make a cleaner ivy.xml)
>
> yes you can do it globally, see:
> http://ant.apache.org/ivy/history/latest-milestone/ivyfile/exclude.html


Ah, I actually was there but missed it. Thanks for pointing it out! :-) I
also got confused for a while as well as I tried to have my <exclude>
directly under <dependencies> but it seems that I have to have it after all
my <dependency> tags (for my ivy.xml to validate against the XML-Schema
definition). It would be an improvement suggestion for the manual to specify
where in the structure a tag should occur, presently it simply mentions
which parent node in the DOM an element has which wasn't enough in this
case.

Anyway, it's working now! :-)