Are the discussions about what the new packaging system will look like complete?
Personally, I feel a sense of "if it's not broken...". I think it was Dan (but maybe not) who said that the build is the way it is because "it works". Are we (and our users) prepared to go through the pain of finding another way of creating a working build which looks different to our current one. But that aside, does using something other than Ant give a tangible benefit? If "yes", then I have no objection. The work to move to Maven has already been done, yes? > Do we want to support 2 build systems? A thousand times "no". :-) On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Sim IJskes - QCG <s...@qcg.nl> wrote: > Group, > > Can i have your ideas about introducing a new way of building river. > > Do we need to replace ant? > > Do we want to support 2 build systems? > > Gr. Sim > > > -- > QCG, Software voor het MKB, 071-5890970, http://www.qcg.nl > Quality Consultancy Group b.v., Leiderdorp, Kvk Den Haag: 28088397 >
