Well, I didn't mean to start a controversy or anything, but it has been an interesting read.
And yes, in this case Victor, I prefer the pig without lipstick. You at least get a genuine view of what's going on. I've found over time I've come up with a reasonable set of practices or patterns for using Ant and handling dependencies which I've found works well and lets me handle updating components as needed with reasonable ease. Not quite as automated as Maven may handle it, but I don't think that's a bad thing. I only use Ivy for public/open source projects, mainly so I don't have to package all the required jars with the source, and even then I tend to set transitive to false and explicitly pull the jars I need. For in house projects I use a common repository and the aforementioned set of practices. In his entertaining blog post, Tour de Babel (Sept 2004 http://steve.yegge.googlepages.com/tour-de-babel), Steve Yegge likened perl to exploded whale guts. This is what Maven really reminds me of whenever I try and set up a maven based project. I like the folder layout practice, and I like being able to pull the required jars "from the cloud", but then prefer Ant for the rest. Ivy still has a bit of whale guts in it, but given it is more focused on doing one job instead of doing everything, it is more manageable. You wind up with a build system which ends up being the tail, wagging the dog. I'll give Maven another go sometime after version 3 comes out. Thanks for the feedback, all. E. (who has used his metaphor quota for the week.) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" 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/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
