upgrade common-collections / velocity?

[Ian Young]

> On 16 May 2017, at 00:38, Brent Putman <putmanb at georgetown.edu> wrote:
> 
> So if I'm understanding correctly, this is essentially introducing a layer of indirection, by 1) creating a POM-only project that contains a dependencyManagement section 2) including that dependency in your own POM's dependencyManagement section.  So sort of declaring the dependencies by reference rather than by value.
> 
> I think I like it.   IMHO I think we should look into this in more detail to understand the nuances of how it works and confirm it does what we want.  So yes, seems very interesting.
> 
> In a way, this is kind of like multiple inheritance for the POM - since you can presumably include multiple BOMs - but just for the dependencyManagement section.  So I guess it's more like a mix-in.


I think that's about right. I have been using the Spring Boot BOM for a while in a project, alongside the Shibboleth parent project, and it helps simplify things a fair bit. It would take a bit of thought to figure out how we should make BOMs available, though, because there are multiple use cases: some part of the current parent POM might be worth extracting, but for the IdP extension use case we'd probably be more interested in something like the Spring Boot BOM, which has more depth.

With things built on top of the MDA, I've had quite a few interactions caused by  using the Shibboleth parent POM and inheriting stuff that wasn't just component pinnings. It would be nice to separate these out.

    -- Ian




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://shibboleth.net/pipermail/dev/attachments/20170517/ca5222f1/attachment.html>