Re: maven.
Re: maven.
- Subject: Re: maven.
- From: Joe Little <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 08:45:45 -0700
I've been wondering if gant (grail's groovy front end to gant)
wouldn't at least allow one to add dependency functionality onto ant
and avoid the rest. The grails guys do allow "plugin style" dependency
installation, etc in the gant process.
On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 6:31 AM, Andrus Adamchik <email@hidden> wrote:
> Ant is actually nice, but it doesn't scale.
>
> Maven scales, but otherwise sucks.
>
> Build systems are complex, so I guess there's no simple solution. I am
> mildly curious to check out Ruby-based build systems for Java
> (http://buildr.apache.org/), but I am not holding my breath.
>
> Andrus
>
>
> On Apr 3, 2009, at 4:01 PM, Mike Schrag wrote:
>>
>> man, maven people .. i'm trying .. I really am .. I don't like being the
>> guy who just hates something based on impressions and not experiences,
>> because I think that's how lots of people judge WO ... but I'm reading
>> "http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-the-lifecycle.html";
>> -- Which is like "The Introduction to the Overview" and I mostly already
>> want to kill myself. I really don't know what it is about maven, but it's
>> like someone tried to come up with the most complex solution to these
>> problems they could. Every sentence just introduces some new layer -- it's
>> like a build system composed of Matryoshka. I have the distinct impression
>> that one could solve 75% of this problem with 10% of the complexity. I
>> think Maven's trying to solve 100% of the problem and they get where they
>> are. All I really want is my ant build file to build or download
>> dependencies first. I would say I basically want Ivy, except that kind of
>> pisses me off, too. Ivy is like a couple of Maven guys split off to write a
>> different solution to 98% of the problem instead of 100%.
>>
>> I think this is the problem with Java vs Ruby people. The Rails community
>> is happy to put out a framework that is simple and narrowly focused. It
>> seems to me that the Java community isn't happy unless every level of the
>> framework is a dependency-injected pluggable framework for building
>> frameworks. Where's my simple dependency manager? Where's my ant task that
>> just lets me say:
>>
>> <dependencies>
>> <dependency name="log4j" version="1.2.14" source="someMavenRepo"
>> dest="Libraries"/>
>> <dependency name="MyCustomFramework" version="latest" source="myRepo"
>> dest="${wo.local.frameworks}"/>
>> </dependencies>
>>
>> Ant does everything else I care about. I hate ant, don't get me wrong,
>> but it's pretty straightforward. I understand Maven is trying to do a lot
>> more, and that's super great and all, but I don't WANT that. I'm not sure
>> MOST people want that. I'm sure SOME people want that, and they are
>> probably loving it.
>>
>> I can even sort of maybe get behind their project layout .. After you
>> stare at it for a while, it sort of makes sense why it's like that.
>>
>> Anyway. I'm TRYING not to hate, but I am just not feeling it.
>>
>> ms
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>> Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>>
>>
>> This email sent to email@hidden
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>
> This email sent to email@hidden
>
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
| References: | |
| | >maven. (From: Mike Schrag <email@hidden>) |
| | >Re: maven. (From: Andrus Adamchik <email@hidden>) |