If you want seamless alignment of code format, checkstyle, and PMD between maven and the IDE, then, at least for eclipse, some project-specific wiring is required. I put that into place a long time ago for Mahout and the m-e-p. I don't know if it's currently in working condition.
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 3:29 PM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> wrote: > Sounds good. > > But which maven features are we using that cause problems? Surely our > project structure is about as simple as it gets for multi-module maven > projects. > > For that matter, you could say that maven's project structure makes it > harder for vi users. If there is something to be done to help that without > losing maven, I am happy for the vi users to do it. > > On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Jeff Eastman > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Sure, but if the Maven features we use, or the way in which we use them, >> disenfranchise the users of an important IDE then I think we are doing our >> customers a disservice. This is just like many web-based products which >> work only on IE; they restrict themselves to that browser user base. It >> takes some extra work to support all the versions of all the popular >> browsers but many organizations feel it is worth the effort. >> >> I think we should make a conscious decision in this case not to >> disenfranchise the Eclipse community. >> >> >> >> On 12/5/11 1:10 PM, Sean Owen wrote: >> >>> We shouldn't support anything but Maven itself. Its up to the IDEs to >>> support Maven then. If IntelliJ does it better then maybe people will >>> favor >>> it but that's up to the user. I don't think we should favor any IDE by >>> itself. >>> On Dec 5, 2011 7:41 PM, "Jeff >>> Eastman"<jdog@**windwardsolutions.com<[email protected]>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> I will check that out today and report back. >>>> >>>> The larger issue I see is that, by doing all of our maven development in >>>> IntelliJ and not keeping Eclipse working as a viable IDE option, that we >>>> are not doing a good job of supporting our customer base. All the shops >>>> I've worked in for the last ten years have been Eclipse shops. I echo >>>> Benson's concern about the amount of neural energy needed to make the >>>> switch, and forcing that switch in order to do Mahout-based development >>>> will certainly make us less useful in those organizations which, for >>>> better >>>> or worse, are Eclipse shops too. >>>> >>>> I don't know yet what issues are preventing me from working in Eclipse >>>> Indigo + m2e 1.0 but they are reproducible and I think it is a very high >>>> priority to figure them out and resolve them. >>>> >>>> Jeff >>>> >>>> On 12/4/11 6:39 PM, Ted Dunning wrote: >>>> >>>> Do the eclipse files that I posted on dropbox do any good for eclipse? >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Benson Margulies<bimargulies@gmail.**** >>>>> com<[email protected]> >>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>> If you can add intellij helpfulness to the mahout tree, please do. >>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 7:44 PM, Ted Dunning<[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Can't intelliJ export eclipse projects? (it has a menu item with that >>>>>>> promise) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Take a look at >>>>>>> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/****36863361/eclipse.tgz<http://dl.dropbox.com/u/**36863361/eclipse.tgz> >>>>>>> <http://**dl.dropbox.com/u/36863361/**eclipse.tgz<http://dl.dropbox.com/u/36863361/eclipse.tgz>>which >>>>>>> is the >>>>>>> result me doing that on a modified mahout directory. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If that shows promise, I can do it on trunk. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>
