because developers can't know both? we use both on OpenEJB (ok the ant part is small but it is used through the maven plugin).
I don't know if it is because i used more maven than ant but when i checked out tomcat the first time i wondered where was modules (corresponding to jars). I was doing the same with ant. So i don't say use mvn or ant even if IMHO mvn could be a benefit for the community. I just say be consistent with your artifacts. - Romain 2011/12/19 Mladen Turk <mt...@apache.org> > On 12/19/2011 08:58 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > >> There is a big part of tomcat which doesn't need maven because it doesn't >> need to be standard (the installers are a great example). >> >> > Installer is just ant exec task with some filtering > for getting the versions correctly. > We have multiple release artifacts using different compressors > having different line endings, so I suppose that would > stay with ant as well. > > > I spoke about the common part which is today not obvious because of the >> false modularity of the project. >> >> > So it would be ant + maven I suppose. > Fine, who's gonna do it and maintain? > > > > Regards > -- > ^TM > > ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.**org<dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org > >
