commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
Subject Re: unmavenising Commons projects
Date Mon, 24 Jun 2002 00:12:38 GMT

Craig, just a few questions:

Which of mavens 'conventions' do not fit your needs? FWIW, we have been
getting 'outsiders' involved with maven and gathering requirements. I ask
the question seriously, as this is the first time I've heard your concerns
voiced, and I appreciate and respect your opinion. I know there's a lot
that Maven doesn't currently do, and we need to ensure that most
requirements are covered in some way.

I'm happy for you guys to wait for a 1.0 release of Maven. What it means is
that Maven 1.0 will be out sooner rather than later, and that we'll have
covered all the requirements that people have for reasonable acceptance.

FWIW, I don't consider someone that doesn't use Maven stupid. There are
quite valid reasons not to use Maven, but since Maven is changing, those
reasons may disappear over time.

A quick look about commons shows that the docs and consistency of the
projects are very varied. This decreases adoption of the code. For example:
- DBCP has no home page, javadocs etc. A casual glancer would write this
code off as unusable.
- The listing of sandbox components is incomplete
- Commons home page still lists Cactus as a component
etc. In short Commons and sandbox are a shambles.

I'm not blaming anybody for these problems, as I'm a committer on Commons
and could fix them myself. But rather than fix every project's shortcomings
when they are so similar in needs, I've decided to help out on Maven.
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting

           "Craig R.                                                       
           <craigmcc@apache.                                            To 
           org>                     Jakarta Commons Developers List        
           06/24/02 08:25 AM                                            cc 
           Please respond to                                               
           "Jakarta Commons                                        Subject 
           Developers List"         Re: unmavenising Commons projects      

On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Jon Scott Stevens wrote:

> Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2002 13:51:33 -0700
> From: Jon Scott Stevens <>
> Reply-To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <>
> Subject: Re: unmavenising Commons projects
> on 6/23/02 12:03 PM, "" <> wrote:
> > Removing the ant file in a component without a vote is unacceptable
> > regardless of what Maven does.
> >
> > Costin
> People used to say that about Makefiles and build.xml files. =)

The usability difference between Makefiles and build.xml files is so
obvious that no marketing was required.  The functionality difference
between do-it-yourself build.xml files and Maven is clear, but requires
you to buy in to a set of conventions that you didn't have any voice in
developing, and don't necessarily address everyone's needs.

I share Costin's annoyance with Mavenites who think anyone who doesn't
use it is stupid, and don't plan to convert any of the commons packages
I'm involved in until after a 1.0 release, and until after agreement from
the other committers on those packages.

This whole process might get accelerated a lot if the Maven propoents
would ask around the other Jakarta projects for what *they* want a build
system to do, outside the community that is already familiar with it or
working on it.

> -jon


To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message