Hmm, now I think the best build system should not be visibile to the
user which
means you just invoke "build.bat/build.sh" and are done - and this is
regardless of using either ant or maven or whatever. And I think this
should be possible with both ant or maven.
The only real difference I see from a user pov is that maven requires a
network connection the first time you build; but as someone already
pointed out this is only required if you want to build maven from the
source. For releases, jetspeed will provide binary versions anyway.

I keep seeing this point of view coming back again and again.
Let me repeat what has been said before: this is *not* the (most) intended 
usage of jetspeed.

If Jetspeed were a "blackbox" product one installs and uses as is, then I'd say 
this whole
build system discussion would be pointless anyway.
AFAIK, the Jetspeed committers themselves never had big problems building 
Jetspeed *locally*
for their specific environment using maven.
Neither was building a demo/binary with Tomcat and using an embedded database.

What I don't understand is why so many think that is all what is needed!

As soon as one really is going to *use* Jetspeed, e.g. install your own portal 
and tweak it
to your own requirements like the simplest of all customizations: using your 
own portal name
instead of jetspeed, you're gonna need to *build* your own portal.
Create a new jetspeed.war (with probably a different name), use different 
databases, add
services, change assembly settings, deploy on different platforms and 
application servers, etc.

Now please, if the maven advocates here can provide us with this neat maven 
extension which
supports all of the above customizations (and more!), is flexible enough for 
all our different
systems and requirements, easy to use and understand and, most importantly, 
just WORKS, then
you *might* get my vote.

Oh, and it should also nicely integrate in our IDEs so we can finally properly 
debug and run our
unit tests again using it...

I don't care for all the other nice projects which so perfectly build using 
maven.
I say most, if not all, don't need customization *by the users* like Jetspeed.
But, if someone can point me to a solution, or even better provide one, which 
proves the contrary,
I'll give it my highest attention.

As I said before (I think it was on the dev list though), for companies which 
have a strict policy
and a high to absolute control on the development environments, maven might be 
a gift from heaven.
But you'll need dedicated attention on keeping your environments healthy and in 
sync with external updates.

We, as Jetspeed committers, are not so lucky we can predict all end users 
wishes, nor are we able
(and certainly not willing) to enforce or limit to one way of using it.
That would negate one of the most important features Apache and Jetspeed 
provide: freedom of usage.

I'll stick to my vote for dropping maven and move to ant for now.

Regards, Ate

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to