On Feb 12, 2008, at 12:21 PM, Allen Gilliland wrote:
I would have to agree with Dave here, Maven vs. Ant has nothing to
do with wanting to get people to be involved with the project. I've
worked on Roller quite a bit and never felt that there was anything
particularly difficult about the build process using purely ant,
especially not something that would magically bring in new
developers if we had Maven.
Personally, I have never been a Maven fan and have never seen it
make any significant improvement in a build environment that I have
worked with. I would echo Phillip's opinion that Maven is "over-
engineered" and has never really proved itself to me.
-- Allen
Not a Maven fan myself, but I wonder if really the core issue being
referred to is a predictable project structure? Getting to know the
ins and outs of Roller development does mean learning about the build
structure and how things are laid out. Perhaps, to point is a Maven
build would be more "pick up and code?" If this is part/all of the
issue, then I wonder if we need clearer documentation or a cleanup
pass on the exiting Ant build.
--
Matthew Montgomery
.Sun Engineering
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
