Perhaps you'd be interested in Polyglot Maven?  http://polyglot.sonatype.org/

--b
______________________________
Brian M. Carr
Identity and Access Management
ITS Applications
University of Texas at Austin
V: 512-232-6419
F: 512-471-5746
[email protected]

On Oct 26, 2010, at 1:56 PM, Kenneth McDonald wrote:

>> If a build can be described as a small number of facts, XML is an
>> unobjectional representation for those facts. If a POM fits on a page,
>> verbosity of XML is just not an issue.
> 
> Yeah, but a build often does not fit on  a page, and I'm building some pretty 
> simple stuff!
> 
> To argue for the flexibity of Maven is (AFAIK) defensible. It's power (from 
> what little knowledge I have), likewise.
> 
> But, I'm sorry to say, the verbosity of XML is a major, major issue. I bring 
> you back to the simple fact of: If XML were so expressive, why aren't most 
> modern languages written in XML? If programmers had to write their systems in 
> a dialect of XML, put in the redundant tags, escape everything that _isn't_ a 
> literal, etc.,  then we would have very poor programmer productivity.
> 
> I've looked at pages and pages of POM files, trying to learn things. And my 
> conclusion is that Maven was _fundamentally flawed_ in choosing XML as its 
> base. 
> 
> Cheers,
> Ken
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> 

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to