-1 Maven is cool for the dependency management. For project like gwt ones a small ant script is more productive. The dependancy can then be handled by ivy (and possibly based on a maven repo).
On 30 sep, 11:39, Harald Pehl <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 for Maven nested module friendliness. > > On 30 Sep., 08:46, Michał Sędzielewski <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > and what is the opinion of Googlers? > > > On 29 Wrz, 20:37, Daniel Jue <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > +1 for Maven nested module friendliness. > > > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Iain Shigeoka <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > +1 Maven friendly is ideal. Less ideal but better than current is > > > > separation of source and compiled code as the original poster mentioned. > > > > > -iain > > > > > On Sep 29, 2009, at 9:02 AM, Michał Sędzielewski wrote: > > > > >> I agree, it would be nice to have maven structure in GWT 2.0 > > > > >> On 28 Wrz, 15:45, logicpeters <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >>> Can anyone tell me if there are plans to rework the way the > > > >>> currentGWTproject structure is configured for2.0? Mxing the source > > > >>> and > > > >>> compiled code in the /war folder has been a real pain in the butt for > > > >>> build scripts and source control. I've been trying to "mavenize" our > > > >>> project, and find the various solutions to be un-elegant hacks that > > > >>> wind up confusing the structure even more. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
