> * Lack of good documentation. Rightfully at top of the list. Mergere's book was helpful, as was Peopleware tutorial. There is a lack for a comprehensive article on maven's concepts. It may sound like easy criticism but documentation in source code is also somewhat scarce.
> * Community unwilling to help me with my problems. Not true if you dont expect instant feedback. Support for maven "campanion projects" like doxia or wagon is a bit less reliable and you need to stay tuned to several lists. > * My project is too complex to switch. I have been involved in using maven1 and maven2 on two different big (at least for me) projects. The first one is a J2EE project with several subprojects for business components, one supporting project, one webapp project and several data objects projects. It worked with clearcase as SCM and CC as CI engine. It needed lot of maven.xml scripts to get working (multi modules build, various configurations, code generation ...) and a somewhat horrific directory structure and properties settings. The team that created this did a great work at making it usable but I fear that maintenance will be a nightmare. It works but it's slow and requires direct access to the repo. The second one is a client-server swing application with access to proprietary data layer. It consists in about 30-40 business logic (read screens and queries) modules, a couple of framework modules, some supporting code, a site module and a wrapper application module. Development is done partially off-shore, we have code generation process and created a custom archetypes to hold its result and pass it over to development teams. Integration with subversion and continuum is great, and all of it works seamlessly and securly for teams on both shores thanks to https access and repository hirearchy. This project is not J2EE so we dont have deployment to AS problems but we have different in-house and integration test environments that must be switchable at will. All in all, experiences with both version was painfull but enlightning. You have to struggle in different parts, plugins and reporting in m2 is not polished (and somewhat unfinished), but all in all m2 has something important that was lacking in m1: Conceptual integrity (n.1 software property according to F.Brooks) and elegance. For simple projects, m2 is simply too easy ! J2EE support may be broken, AFAICT from the list's message, but anyway J2EE is broken (:-) ) > * There are not enough plugins available. False, but most of them are in beta or worse state. My 50 cents contribution to this debate. -- OQube < software engineering \ génie logiciel > Arnaud Bailly, Dr. \web> http://www.oqube.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
