On 28/03/2011 4:30 AM, bryan.dollery wrote:
Hi Ron,
Maven isn't meant to be enforcing convention. It's meant to work without
configuration /if/ convention fits in your particular domain. Where
convention doesn't fit it's meant to be configurable.
To a certain extent that is true but as you can see in the forum, there
are limits
As for best practice... Using maven for version management is /not/ best
practice. It's a convention that maven has introduced and which doesn't
really work very well. The ability to configure things in this area is
critical to maven's success.
Again, you can disagree with Maven's functionality and philosophy but it
is very successful as it is.
Final point: ant is not a substitute for maven. They are completely
different things used for different purposes should not be directly
compared. One is not substitutable for the other. Ant is a build system --
maven is much more than that.
Some people want to do things in a very particular way. Ant is a very
flexible system and can do anything that you want.
Maven is a very powerful tool that supports a particular way of doing
things.
Ron
Bryan
--
View this message in context:
http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Re-Maven-3-0-Artefact-Dependency-version-discussion-request-tp83857p4267200.html
Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
