LOL, +1. Norman 2009/6/12 Bernd Fondermann <[email protected]>: > Robert Burrell Donkin wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 5:47 AM, Eric MacAdie<[email protected]> wrote: >>> How will James be built going forward? Will Maven or Ant be the preferred >>> build tool? Will one be used for maintaining 2.X and another for 3? >> >> a controversial question so i'll try to explain the consensus as i see >> it (hopefully anyone who disagrees will jump in) >> >> 2.x is stable and changes will be kept minimal. so ant will remain the >> preferred build tool and maven only used to build the website. >> >> for the james 3.x server code base, it's controversial. both are >> supported and maintained. > > I'm supportive for moving the 3.x server build to maven, too. Finally. > It's breaking my heart, but better to break my heart than the project. > ;-) > > Do we need a vote? > > Bernd > >> >> for the 3.x libraries which have been factored out, we're moving >> towards maven (it has much better OSGi support and can be maintained >> with less duplication) >> >> - robert >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
