Hi Steve,
I agree with you - Maven is the better tool to use. But forcing everyone to use Maven at this stage might be a bit demotivating. We are quite happy to get development rolling again and if we find time after the first few releases we switch over to Maven. I suggest that we are supporting ANT as plain-vanilla build tool and Maven doing the full-fledged reporting in the meantime.
Cheers,
Siegfried Goeschl
Steve Quint wrote:
At 11:19 AM +0200 4/12/05, Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
Well, ANT is a development tool as well ... :-). Thinking along these lines we should add the JARs to the binary distribution
I know absolutely nothing about Maven, but AFAIK it is a developer tool
and not for being used by the end user. In other words, I'd still recommend
that these jar files are being added to the binary distribution. If
you feel, you
are able to do this with Ant, fine for me.
No. Maven can be used to copy all of the dependencies to the output directory, where all of it can be zipped up into the binary distribution.
Let's not move backwards here. Maven provides all of the functionality of Ant, and addresses many problems beyond what Ant can do. Adding jars into the CVS repository that can be fetched using Maven is a step backwards in my opinion.
I understand the reluctance to learn a new tool. We're all very busy. But Maven is a better tool, full stop. Avoiding it is like an attempt to avoid the future. IMHO, the goals we need from build.xml should be copied/ported in the maven build file, and build.xml should be removed from CVS.
