>
> glassfish_at_javadesktop.org wrote:
> > There is a difference between
> <scope>provided</scope> when talking about transitive
> dependencies and when talking about classpaths.
> >
> > When dealing with transitive dependencies, it
> remains as provided. So anything that depends on an
> artifact that depends on the javaee artifact will not
> pull the javaee into it's classpath.
> >
> > For compiling, the javaee.jar will be on the
> classpath with scope provided.
> >
> > The test classpath = all the <scope>test</scope>
> artifacts; followed by the compile classpath.
> >
> > Thus, the javaee.jar is on the test classpath...
> therefore the unit tests will fail if they reference
> any of the borked classes as they cannot be
> classloaded.
> >
> >
> What you are saying sounds different from what is
> mentioned hare:
> http://docs.codehaus.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=
> 26408
>
> Thanks,
> Sahoo
>
AFAIK,
the link you give is the _proposal_ wiki pages.
It's in the Maven 2.0 _Design_ Documents section, and the proposal starts with the word "Add".
Also see this discussion:
http://www.nabble.com/Surefire-includes-artifacts-with-scope-'provided'-in-the-runtime-classpath,-is-this-correct--t4016962s177.html
(I seem to be hitting this issue at the same time as others)
-Stephen
[Message sent by forum member 'stephenconnolly' (stephenconnolly)]
http://forums.java.net/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=227046