Bernd Fondermann wrote:
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 11:57, Emmanuel Lecharny <[email protected]> wrote:
Niklas Gustavsson wrote:
Hi
Should we drop the Vysper Ant build in favour of the Maven build?
Right now we have two build systems to maintain, which will cause
confusion and end up being out of sync. Do we need a vote for this, or
should we just svn del build.xml?
I don't think we need a vote, just an agreement from Bernd. I would favor a
maven build and a removal of the ant build. It will allow us to remove the
libs rom svn too.
I'm not pro or con a specific build tool, but I think, for any Apache
project, not having its libraries accessible in SVN somewhere near the
code is bad.
My position was the same a few years ago.But I gently swift from it for
many reasons...
Libraries are hard dependencies, but tools like mvn (and others) treat
them like soft dependencies.
Not really true. You can impose the version you want to use.
What if repos get lost?
What if the SVN repos is lost ? The odds are pretty equivalent.
Or are
compromised?
Same for SVN. Now, as jars in a maven repo are signed, you are more safe
with it than with SVN, as you don't sign the jars in svn.
Given the number of artifacts and their transient
dependencies, this will happen sooner or later (or has already
happened without getting noticed).
Same for svn.
mvn is much more easy to get a build up and running and add features
like reporting, etc. that's a huge advantage over ant.
Also, I work a lot without online Internet access. mvn is more of a
pain then than it is normally. (Yes, I know about offline modes etc.)
mvn -o + you can have your own repo on your disk, with all the needed
jars. Yes, it's a bit of sweat to set it up...
So while I don't oppose mvn as a tool, it doesn't free us from our
reponsabilities to make our software available not only today, but
also in the future.
That said, I'm somewhere between -0 and +0 for the switch.
What bother me about Maven repo currently is that it's often a PITA when
you want to add a new jar in it (we waited months for a new BoucnyCastle
version to be included), and the repo management still remain fuzzy to
me : who is in charge ? Why dare we depending on a private company
(sonatype) repos ? (correct me if it's not the case anymore).
But all in all, I know think that is easier and safer to use maven than
to get everything in svn and buildling with ant. Plus the fact is that
maven is probably more efficient and more powerful than ant those days,
so I think keeping maven only is probably better. And trust me, I hated
maven in the past !
--
--
cordialement, regards,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
directory.apache.org
