On Feb 12, 2008 11:41 AM, David Jencks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think I'm noticing something here. There are several people who > are not (yet) major contributors to roller asking for a maven build > since they find the current ant build a major impediment to > understanding the project and working on it, and there are several > people who are thoroughly familiar with the current ant build who are > saying they are familiar with the current ant build and it works. > Two of the people who want maven have offered to create the maven > build (and one has done so within the limits of not moving anything). > > This goes along with my general observation that ant is good if you > want to keep your project private and unrelated to other software or > new contributors and maven is good if you want your project to have > good relations with other projects, both as a consumer of > dependencies such as spec jars and as a supplier of parts such as > roller to the geronimo roller plugin. > > One of the biggest reasons I haven't found the time to propose a > patch for the new security stuff (which I consider seriously flawed) > is the pain of trying to understand how parts of the project are > interrelated. This is just not a problem with a reasonably well laid > out maven project.
Maybe so and maybe not, but if you think the reason I don't see value in Maven is because I want to keep Roller a "private" project and have bad relations with other projects then you are wrong. I must say, I find that insinuation a little insulting. Again, I ask: what *specific problems* that we are now facing with Roller can be solved by moving the build process to Maven? - Dave
