> > Yep, and that's what Ant is trying to remedy (IMO). Thus it makes sense > > to me to reuse Ant task from our java plugin. > > > > Yes, I know, I'm repeating myself... ;-) > > > > I've had Jason's opinion on this idea of reusing Ant tasks from our java > > plugin but not other's. What do you think guys? > > I think it's a viable alternative. > > I can't see how the current set of Maven2 plugins is an advantage, for all > the speed and testability on offer you have to balance that against the > effort required to make it user friendly. > > There are lots of issues Ant covers well I don't think we've even begun to > look at.
That's why I would consider groovy, as it has an ant builder (almost the same way as jelly has), has decent xml processing and building tools (anyway, the same guy stands behind it as behind jelly, and many ideas were transferred) + it's a compilable, interpretable, embeddable terse language. The main drawback for me was that it is in a state of the continous flux. incze --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
