On 9/15/05, Ashley Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've actually been talking about ant tasks, whereas I think Chris > (correct me if I'm wrong) was talking about whole build.xml files. I > don't see this as somehow replacing any of what Maven has to offer, > it just offers another language for writing plugins in besides java. > I mean how much more damage can I do in ant than I can do in Java ;)
I am talking about whole build files, although ones that are likely single purpose. Case in point; I have an Axis build file that ultimately uses the Axis-provided ant task; wsdl2java. But this build step (generating Java Stubs, Proxies, etc from a WSDL) is significantly more complicated than that. It actually requires many internal targets to accomplish (e.g. check if files are up-to-date, HTTP GET the WSDL if it's not local, disallow RPC-style WSDL, copy the gen-ed files, etc. etc.) In the end, it's ~325 lines of Ant. My job was only to script it -- not to code or debug the underlying Tasks. That would be a waste of my time... I agree w/ Ashley (hopefully I'm not putting words in her mouth ;-). It is in no way perverse to embed Ant. And it in no way undermines the usefulness of Maven. On the contrary, it opens up Maven to a huge realm of possibility. To me it is akin to Ant providing an <exec> Task. Sometimes you have no choice but to wrap out to something else. It's all about getting the job done -- and the right tool for the job. In fact, IMO, Maven should provide the same sort of interoperability w/ Python, Ruby, and Perl. Embrace them and make them first class citizens. As we all know, one can do magic in, say, Perl, that is much too long-winded in Java. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
