On Fri, 3 Jan 2003 01:10, Berin Loritsch wrote:
> Maven
> -----
> * Integrates with Forrest, but not by default.
> * Not easy to extend with user defined modules, it requires user
> intervention to install project specific modules.
not in CVS version!
Writing plugins is very easy (usually just a jelly script and some resources).
Recently their download as just another dependency made it easy to add them
into your builds.
> Maven
> -----
> * No way to "seed" a new project like Forrest does. I think work
> might be underway for it though.
No read need. Have a look at spice to see how small the new projects
descriptors are. With CVS version of maven the descriptors get even smaller!
> * Maven downloads alot of stuff to get started. If you don't have
> a fat internet connection, your first build takes a really long
> time.
This has been partially fixed as it only downloads on demand.
> * Difficult to extend with project-specific modules. The machinery
> is there, but it has a lot of rough edges.
So not the case. Can you point out something that you found difficult to do
with it? The one thing that has held me up was a bug in the POM loading.
> -o0 Unclear Things 0o-
>
> Both projects have the typical Open Source failings. Documentation
> is sparse, and typically only covers what the developers were
> concentrating on. For example, both focus more attention to
> _converting_ an existing project than to _creating_ a new project
> from scratch. Between the two, Maven does have marginally better
> documentation.
I feel comfortable with Maven (after the first few days bashing head against
wall). So feel free to ask anything about it - once you get a grip of jelly
everything becomes relatively easy and jelly rocks.
> Maven
> -----
> * What happens if I don't have an internet connection after I do
> the initial install? Will it be useless?
It still works - just need to set a property. It will break if you add a new
dependency unless it is in a local repo. It may also break if you run
activity/cvslog or whatever reports.
> I am a fan of black box tools like Maven, but if I need to do
> something a little out of the ordinary, I like the flexibility
> of Centipede.
I don't get why you would think this - what is hard about adding ... anything
to maven?
> Also, we (or is it just me?) would like to
> provide two versions of a project--A smaller JAR where the user
> has to include all the other dependencies, and a larger JAR
> where all Avalon code is included--making it easier for a
> user to use some of the larger and more complex subprojects.
I saw commits go by to do that in Maven ... I think. If not such a plugin
should be easy to do as we already know all the dependencies.
--
Cheers,
Peter Donald
'Most men would rather die than think. Many do.'
Bertrand Russell
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
