Michal Maczka wrote:
The original author does need to learn that open source
coding is not created out of some desire to 'sell' a product
to lots and lots of people, but to satisfy the itch of the
people involved.
There is some truth here. However, an open-source project's
success is just as much judged by its audience as any other
project. And a top level apache project would have more
ambition than this I thought.
Yeah are right. "Our vision" should be dropped and we should implement
every single stupid feature then is requested and do this even if those
features are in mutual contradiction. And the most frequent request is:
"you guys should be like ant". This is not hard thing to do. We will
simply remove files from our CVS repository and import files from Ant
repository replacing every occurrence of word "ant" with "maven". If
this is what will make people happy we should listen to them! Don't we?
Michal, this isn't helpful. I understand your point, but there are
better ways of stating it. It is important though to learn the strengths
and weaknesses of what you are being compared to so that you can set up and
maintain an "appologetics" page. "Appologetics" is the study of defending
your position.
What do you recognize as the strengths of ANT? What are its weaknesses?
How does Maven leverage the strengths and minimize the weaknesses?
That type of thing can be set up and merely maintained. Then when you
receive a request for "you guys should be like ant" you can tell them
to RTFM. It shows you did your homework--and that you recognize the
good and the bad from that de-facto standard build tool.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
