Mike Heath wrote: > On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 09:16 +0100, Danny Angus wrote: > > > > > Wouldn't we need to switch to maven to get away with > > > something like this? > > > > We could use maven, if we wanted to. > +1 > > I've moved a lot of my work projects and pet projects to > Maven and can't > see myself ever going back to Ant.
For a new project I would advocate Maven. For an existing project such as James I'm not sure that the benefits justify the conversion effort. But if anyone has the 'itch' its worth further discussion. > One of my biggest frustrations with working on James has been updating > my Eclipse classpath to reflect the changing dependencies. > With Maven I > can just do "maven eclipse" and I'm done. I think this kind of > simplicity could help attract more developers to James. I > know I'm more > likely to dig into an open-source project if they're using > Maven because > I know it's going to be easy to get things up and running. Once you have learnt Maven. Personally, I don't find our Ant set-up presents any great difficulty. Perhaps that is because I'm familiar with it? -- Steve --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
