Has anyone ever used Tiddlywiki as a means to learn something as complex as Maven2? That really seems to help in my option. It's alot faster to access than the site and you can refer back to it when you need to learn how to do something.
On 9/27/07, Insitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Lee Meador" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > If XML is the problem for Maven, why is it not for Ant. Can anyone claim > > that a makefile's syntax is any easier to understand? In addition, make > > isn't procedural or sequential and that didn't, back in the day, generate > > loads of comments. > > > > It's not that you really were arguing the "pro" side of those arguments, But > > IMO the arguments about how 1) XML is a pain and 2) Maven is not procedural > > are not truly problems but for some reason they bother people in the context > > of whatever is really bothering people. (I don't claim to know what that is > > but it seems to exist.) > > > > As you have noted, I did not argue about the truthfulness of the > arguments about XML's nature and maven's underlying process. I just > noticed that: > 1. people - or at least some of them - I have in my training sessions > generally find it painful to > wirte a pom by hand. I suspect they also find it painful to write > an ant script by hand... > 2. they have a hard time understanding all the "magic" behind $> mvn > install when they are used to $> ant all or $> make all. In the > latter case, they can track in the build file the sequence of > build procedures undertaken, while in the former, everything is > built-in in the plugin/lifecycle binding. > > What I was considering to solve this "marketability" issues is: > 1. wrap maven's pom in some nicer language, maybe something vaguely > looking like rake or scons script. For example, a minimal POM > would look like: > > id=toto:tutu:1.0 > dependencies=junit:junit:3.8.1,mygroup:mylib:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Of cours, configuring plugins would clutter things up but you get > the idea. My underlying assumption about this is that maven may be > wrapped as some simple functional language. > 2. output the build plan at the start/end of the execution of > maven. Hudson does a nice trick when building a project, it wraps > MavenPluginManager to display all executed mojos. Surely the build > plan features of maven2.1 would give better output. > > And if you want my personal feeling, I think that XML really sucks as > a way for human to write something, > whether for ant, maven, xslt or anything else and exists just because > the technology for manipulating easily small languages is not > widespread or widely available. > > But of course, all this is my own small point of view. YMMV... > > Regards, > -- > OQube < software engineering \ génie logiciel > > Arnaud Bailly, Dr. > \web> http://www.oqube.com > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
