Sure. As I said, I strongly recommend you to *think* before moving. Not
to not moving at all. My point is about maintainability, not about
technology. You don't have to list the advantages of maven 2 for
development / site building to me. :-)
Best regards
Henning
On Sat, 2006-12-02 at 04:40 -0800, Thomas Fischer wrote:
> I'd be -1 to switch to an ant build. It seems that people tend to forget
> the advantages that a maven build has, e.g. :
> - Maven has an easy dependency managing mechanism
> - Maven automatically executes the tests during building
> - Maven creates all these useful reports on the site
> And building the jars using ant and the site using maven is also not an
> option in my eyes. Plus, the maven 1 plugin needs a maven 1 build, and the
> maven 2 plugin needs a maven 2 build, so we'd need those anyway.
>
> The reason wy I believe it is better to do builds in maven 2 than in maven
> 1 are the following:
> - Maven 2 builds are much faster.
> - Maven 2 supports parent poms which do not exist locally
> - Maven 2 supports transitive dependencies
> - More people will stop using maven 1 in the future and use maven 2, so
> building from the sources will be easier for those (no deed to nsitall
> and configure maven 1)
>
> As for the migration, I'm volunteering to do it. And there is no sign of
> maven 3, so in my eyes the fear of another migration is unfounded.
>
> Thomas
>
>
> On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Henning P. Schmiedehausen wrote:
>
> > "Greg Monroe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >>> - Switch to Maven 2 as build system. Maven 2 has much better
> >>> multiproject support than Maven 1, so building will be
> >>> easier.
> >
> >> My +0 for Maven 2 is based on the little bit I dug into it
> >> for the add-on stuff. It seemed to add a lot of complication
> >> and extra more effort to do thing outside the "Maven 2 norm"
> >> that was fairly easy in 1. IMHO, build systems should take a
> >> minimum of time away from your development time, not become
> >> a subproject of it's own.
> >
> > I'd *strongly* suggest thinking about the maven support. Maven changed
> > from 1 to 2 completely (different POMs, different program name,
> > different properties, different plugins, different docs) so people
> > moving from m1 to m2 had to throw all their configs (project.xml,
> > maven.xml, properties) away and rework them (most of the time from
> > scratch).
> >
> > And the projects relying on m1 suddently find out that people no
> > longer have the 'old' maven installed and complain about not being
> > able to build the project.
> >
> > There is no guarantee that moving from m2 to m3 will not be the same
> > thing.
> >
> > There *is* a simple solution: Provide basic project building with ant.
> >
> > ant stood the test of time quite nicely. Keep the maven (m1, m2) build
> > optional but build your release archives with ant.
> >
> > Best regards
> > Henning
> >
> > --
> > Henning P. Schmiedehausen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] | J2EE, Linux,
> > 91054 Buckenhof, Germany -- +49 9131 506540 | Apache person
> > Open Source Consulting, Development, Design | Velocity - Turbine guy
> >
> > "Save the cheerleader. Save the world."
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
--
Henning P. Schmiedehausen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] | J2EE, Linux,
91054 Buckenhof, Germany -- +49 9131 506540 | Apache person
Open Source Consulting, Development, Design | Velocity - Turbine guy
"Save the cheerleader. Save the world."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
