Maven favors "Convention over Configuration", and in the past most IDEs, etc are bent to work with a Maven structure, rather than the other way around. Maven without plugins/hacks is pretty stubborn/not-so-flexible about project structure, etc. (Structure can be a good thing, when you have multiple developers)
As indicated in the GEP issue above, it's open to discussion whether or not war/ is supposed to be I/O or just O. IMHO, war/ should only be a target-like directory and not a src, since any source or config files that goes in war/ already have a designated space in main/web-app/ or main/resources. I agree that Maven is not for everyone, and there are definitely cases where its either inappropriate or not even allowed (by bureaucracy). I wouldn't want our Ant friends to be left out or disadvantaged. The Google team is good at coming up with a method that works for 90% of the people, here's hoping they do. On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 9:04 AM, D Peters <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yes. I am not suggesting that GWT change their source tree to the / > src/main type structure that Maven requires. IMHO it should be > Maven's responsibilty to be flexible to difference source tree > structures. However, the concept of "keeping the source tree clean" > is an important one that GWT's build process should subscribe to.. > Otherwise it will always be a pain in the butt when setting up your > build scripts -- whatever tool that you use... > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
