I'm new to Maven. TBH, I didn't give it much thought. Considering how
big some ant build.xml files get, the pom didn't seem overly exagerated.
Could it have been simplified? Sure, but I don't see it as an issue.
Having two different formats I think is worse. Just keep in in mind for
whenever there is a 3.0 release.

Frank Russo
Senior Developer
FX Alliance, LLC

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Raible [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 3:01 PM
> To: Maven Users List
> Subject: Re: Is it possible to make pom.xml simpler?
> 
> 
> It would be interesting to see what *potential* users think - 
> as in current Ant users.
> 
> Asking existing Maven users is a good survey, but it's not a 
> good representation of what the larger Java community thinks IMO.
> 
> Matt
> 
> On 12/15/05, dan tran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > +1 to keep.
> >
> > Supporting both will be maintainant nightmare, drop the 
> current one is 
> > impossible.
> >
> > I am happy to see one format since I am able to focus to 
> creating the 
> > content rather then worrying about syntaxfor each element. 
> The current 
> > syntax is good.
> >
> > -Dan
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 12/15/05, Brett Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Let's not start another attributes vs elements holy war :)
> > >
> > > I have no problem with either, but the reasons I see not 
> to change:
> > > - we would have to support both. This may lead to confusion.
> > > - currently it is very consistent - there are no 
> attributes, lists 
> > > are always visible as lists, etc.  The syntax is a lot more 
> > > memorable, even if it is more verbose.
> > >
> > > I agree that requiring tools is a bad idea, but they 
> certainly won't 
> > > hurt (even an XML editor + XSD will do the trick here). I 
> think the 
> > > focus should be on removing repetition in the content, not the 
> > > syntax.
> > >
> > > That's just my view - others?
> > >
> > > - Brett
> > >
> > > On 12/15/05, Cservenak Tamas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > A very big +1 here!
> > > >
> > > > ~t~
> > > >
> > > > Milos Kleint wrote:
> > > > > maybe there's just need for tools to help creating the pom 
> > > > > content?
> > > > >
> > > > > Milos
> > > > >
> > > > > Chris Berry wrote:
> > > > >> Hi Matt!
> > > > >> A big +1 from me. I've been discussing this w/ John, 
> Jason, et 
> > > > >> al. A push towards simplifying/shortening the XML would be a 
> > > > >> big help. Cheers,
> > > > >> -- Chris
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On 12/15/05, John Casey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> Actually, an even better thing to do would be to 
> participate 
> > > > >>> in the design for 2.1. The page for some of this 
> discussion is 
> > > > >>> at:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> http://docs.codehaus.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=32108
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Cheers,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> John
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Allan Ramirez wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> Please file a jira issue for this
> > > http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> -allan
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Matt Raible wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>> After seeing what the Spring Developers have done to 
> > > > >>>>> simplify
> > > Spring
> > > > >>>>> context files, I can't help but think the same thing is 
> > > > >>>>> possible
> > > for
> > > > >>>>> Maven 2's pom.xml.  Is it possible to add namespaces and 
> > > > >>>>> make something like the following possible?
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Before:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency>
> > > > >>>>>      <groupId>springframework</groupId>
> > > > >>>>>      <artifactId>spring</artifactId>
> > > > >>>>>      <version>1.2.6</version>
> > > > >>>>>    </dependency>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> After:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> <dep:artifact name="org/springframework/spring" 
> > > > >>>>> version="1.2.6"/>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Or just allow attributes to make things a bit cleaner?
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> <dependency groupId="org.springframework" 
> > > > >>>>> artifactId="spring" version="1.2.6"/>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Allowing 1 line instead of 5-6 lines per dependency would 
> > > > >>>>> allow me
> > > to
> > > > >>>>> cut my dependencies listing from 140 lines of XML to 37
> > > lines.  When
> > > > >>>>> the Spring guys allows a couple of elements as attributes 
> > > > >>>>> (<ref>
> > > and
> > > > >>>>> <value>) - it made writing Spring context files *much* 
> > > > >>>>> easier.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Here's an example of my simplified version:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>  <dependencies>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="cargo" artifactId="cargo" 
> > > > >>>>> version="0.6" scope="test"/>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="commons-lang" 
> > > > >>>>> artifactId="commons-lang" version="2.0"/>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="commons-logging"
> > > artifactId="commons-logging"
> > > > >>>>> version="1.0.4"/>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="displaytag" 
> artifactId="displaytag" 
> > > > >>>>> version="1.0" scope="runtime">
> > > > >>>>>      <exclusions>
> > > > >>>>>        <exclusion artifactId="xalan" groupId="xalan"/>
> > > > >>>>>      </exclusions>
> > > > >>>>>    </dependency>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="uk.ltd.getahead" artifactId="dwr" 
> > > > >>>>> version="1.0" scope="runtime"/>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="org.hibernate" 
> > > > >>>>> artifactId="hibernate" version="3.0.5">
> > > > >>>>>      <exclusions>
> > > > >>>>>        <exclusion artifactId="jta" 
> groupId="javax.transaction"/>
> > > > >>>>>      </exclusions>
> > > > >>>>>    </dependency>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="geronimo-spec"
> > > artifactId="geronimo-spec-jta"
> > > > >>>>> version="1.0.1B-rc4"/>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="jmock" artifactId="jmock" 
> > > > >>>>> version="1.0.1" scope="test"/>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="junit" artifactId="junit" 
> > > > >>>>> version="3.8.1" scope="test"/>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="jwebunit" artifactId="jwebunit" 
> > > > >>>>> version="
> > > 1.2"
> > > > >>>>> scope="test"/>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="httpunit" artifactId="httpunit" 
> > > > >>>>> version="
> > > 1.6"
> > > > >>>>> scope="test">
> > > > >>>>>      <exclusions>
> > > > >>>>>        <exclusion artifactId="js" groupId="rhino"/>
> > > > >>>>>      </exclusions>
> > > > >>>>>    </dependency>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="log4j" artifactId="log4j" 
> > > > >>>>> version="1.2.11
> > > "/>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="postgresql" 
> artifactId="postgresql" 
> > > > >>>>> version="8.1-404.jdbc3"/>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="javax.servlet" 
> > > > >>>>> artifactId="servlet-api" version="2.4" scope="provided"/>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="javax.servlet" artifactId="jstl" 
> > > > >>>>> version="1.1.2" scope="runtime"/>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="taglibs" artifactId="standard" 
> > > > >>>>> version="1.1.2" scope="runtime"/>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="opensymphony" 
> artifactId="sitemesh" 
> > > > >>>>> version="2.2.1" scope="runtime"/>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="springmodules" 
> > > > >>>>> artifactId="springmodules-validator" version="0.1"
> > > scope="runtime"/>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="springframework" 
> artifactId="spring" 
> > > > >>>>> version="1.2.6"/>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependency groupId="springframework" 
> > > > >>>>> artifactId="spring-mock" version="1.2.6" scope="test">
> > > > >>>>>      <exclusions>
> > > > >>>>>        <exclusion artifactId="spring-jdbc" 
> > > > >>>>> groupId="springframework"/>
> > > > >>>>>        <exclusion artifactId="spring-web"
> > > groupId="springframework"/>
> > > > >>>>>      </exclusions>
> > > > >>>>>    </dependency>
> > > > >>>>>  </dependencies>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Of course, Ivy's syntax is even simpler, so maybe that'll 
> > > > >>>>> provide some motivation. ;-)
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>    <dependencies>
> > > > >>>>>        <dependency org="apache" 
> name="commons-lang" rev="2.0" />
> > > > >>>>>        <dependency org="apache" 
> name="commons-cli" rev="1.0" />
> > > > >>>>>    </dependencies>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> Matt
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > -
> > > > >>>>> 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]
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>
> > > 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > -
> > > > >>> 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]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > ---
> > > > 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]
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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]

Reply via email to