On 3/27/2012 at 4:38 PM, Robert Muir wrote: > On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Steven A Rowe <[email protected]> wrote: > > Robert, > > > > I disagree with you: I think Maven really is an option. However, > > I do agree that it would be significantly more work, and I recognize > > that lots of devs here loathe Maven, so I will not tilt against this > > particular windmill. > > > > On the technical arguments, though: a) there *is* a JFlex maven > > plugin; and b) if you follow the link you gave to the Jenkins Maven > > trunk build script, you'll see that the one test which was being > > ignored is no longer ignored -- that chunk of the shell script is > > commmented out -- Maven currently runs all tests and passes them > > just as often as the Ant builds. (BasicDistributedZkTest is now an > > unhappy camper no matter which camp it's in these days.) > > Maven refers to the maven build we have: it doesn't support all of > our features. This isn't really a debate, its a fact. I don't argue > that theoretically it can't in the future, but it does not do so > right now. There are a lot of missing tasks (jflex generation was > just a simple one, but there are lots of little things like this). > Sure, it might be possible they could be added, but thats a ton more > work than just addressing jar dependencies.
Agreed. And also besides plus additionally, Lucene/Solr has way more Ant hackers than Maven hackers. Steve
