>>Hate to be an "old fart" here but was ant really all that bad?
Well it is a question isn't it? I suppose this is a flame thread, but I
have to ask, have we over the last two years or so actually got the
benefits that maven promised? And do we believe that maven2 will help?
When I think of maven, I see the POM as a good idea, raising the
abstraction level. The problem has always been what it does with the
POM. I have a feeling that maven should have just been a set of ant
tasks that used the POM for info. Anyway, that design wasn't chosen.
So what works well with maven? Well the end result site can be quite
reasonable. You still have to put in effort though, to fix
navigation.xml, cvs-usage.xml, issue-tracking.xml, add decent links to
each of the reports, manage the history of javadocs...
Building has always seemed to be a nightmare though. I have no faith
that the jar or dist built by maven is the jar/dist that I want (I
always want something non-standard). And one output jar per project is
just crazy (see collections-testframework for example). And we still
don't have a cast-iron way to build a 1.2 compatible release using maven.
So, are we holding on to maven because we feel we should? Are the
claimed benfits really there? And if I'm already using ant for releases,
why shouldn't we do as Hen suggests and generate our reports outside
maven too?
Stephen
Henri Yandell wrote:
On 12/3/05, Steve Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is sort of what I meant when I said it's harder to do these
releases. How is one supposed to KNOW what versions of these 30 or 40
plugins you have to have in order to build a release?
and what if one doesn't want to be on a weird mismash version of Maven
for other projects :)
Does Jakarta or Jakarta-commons have a page that tells you the minimum
maven setup needed to do a site release? If not, it probably should
have. I know this is a dynamic process, but this is nuts.
And then the other direction. I shudder to think what would have
happened if I had tried maven 2.0.
Somewhere a volcano would have erupted.
Hate to be an "old fart" here but was ant really all that bad?
Being a "stupid fart", does Maven have to be this bad? :) I suspect it
does, because we're trying to use it as a power-tool when Maven works
best as a standardisation tool.
Increasingly thinking that we should decouple the site from the
components. Reports would then be tied to builds, so as part of this
release, Net would be building a small number of Reports and putting
them under a versioned space. The site would then link into them much
the same way it does the downloads.
Anyway, the site is deployed. It's gradually pushing itself out to all
the servers.
Just the one server I think :) The site is rsync'd every hour or two
to 'ajax' in Europe. The distributables however are mirrored.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
