cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Giacomo Pati <>
Subject Re: [Vote] Build infrastructure
Date Mon, 29 Sep 2003 11:24:50 GMT
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:

> Antonio Gallardo wrote:
> ...
> > I think it is better to save our efforts by using any of the projects
> > related to this tasks. The idea, is to have a better project management
> > with less effort than we currently have with Ant. Is that right?
> Correct.
> I strongly think that moving to Maven now will be a major and
> unnecessary disruption in our development process, and I don't want to
> see it.
> As I said, it's quite easy to have almost all that Maven provides by
> using other stuff.
> What do we want from Maven?

Or Centipede (it's still proposed, isn't it?)

> 1 - jar downloads: use Ruper or Ant <get>

Nobody said Ant wasn't capable doing so

> 2 - generic targets? Heck, we already have them.

What you mean with generic targets? The Maven reactor?

> 3 - what else? Don't tell me activity reports, because it's an
>      Ant task that Maven simply uses.

No, no, reports and document generation in Maven suck from our POV as
they are using different build tools (Anakia vs. Forrest) and DTDs.

  - simpler build scripts (because of cents/antlibs/plugins)
    ATM we have 1500+ line spread into 14 differet files included by
    XML-Entity definitions
  - deployment of created stuff like jars to repositories for other to
    be used
  - snapshot dependancy resolution (which we have used alot in the past)
  - ease of modularisation capabilities

> Let's not go into a massive build-system change that will make it even
> harder to sense what's happening, and lay out what we need.
> NOTE: I'm the original Centipede author, so yes, I'm definately baised

:-) I knew this would happen

Giacomo Pati
Otego AG, Switzerland -
Orixo, the XML business alliance -

View raw message