commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen Colebourne <>
Subject [all] Maven, help or hinderance?
Date Sun, 04 Dec 2005 01:17:30 GMT
 >>Hate to be an "old fart" here but was ant really all that bad?

Well it is a question isn't it? I suppose this is a flame thread, but I 
have to ask, have we over the last two years or so actually got the 
benefits that maven promised? And do we believe that maven2 will help?

When I think of maven, I see the POM as a good idea, raising the 
abstraction level. The problem has always been what it does with the 
POM. I have a feeling that maven should have just been a set of ant 
tasks that used the POM for info. Anyway, that design wasn't chosen.

So what works well with maven? Well the end result site can be quite 
reasonable. You still have to put in effort though, to fix 
navigation.xml, cvs-usage.xml, issue-tracking.xml, add decent links to 
each of the reports, manage the history of javadocs...

Building has always seemed to be a nightmare though. I have no faith 
that the jar or dist built by maven is the jar/dist that I want (I 
always want something non-standard). And one  output jar per project is 
just crazy (see collections-testframework for example). And we still 
don't have a cast-iron way to build a 1.2 compatible release using maven.

So, are we holding on to maven because we feel we should? Are the 
claimed benfits really there? And if I'm already using ant for releases, 
why shouldn't we do as Hen suggests and generate our reports outside 
maven too?


Henri Yandell wrote:
> On 12/3/05, Steve Cohen <> wrote:
>>This is sort of what I meant when I said it's harder to do these
>>releases.  How is one supposed to KNOW what versions of these 30 or 40
>>plugins you have to have in order to build a release?
> and what if one doesn't want to be on a weird mismash version of Maven
> for other projects :)
>>Does Jakarta or Jakarta-commons have a page that tells you the minimum
>>maven setup needed to do a site release?  If not, it probably should
>>have.  I know this is a dynamic process, but this is nuts.
>>And then the other direction.  I shudder to think what would have
>>happened if I had tried maven 2.0.
> Somewhere a volcano would have erupted.
>>Hate to be an "old fart" here but was ant really all that bad?
> Being a "stupid fart", does Maven have to be this bad? :) I suspect it
> does, because we're trying to use it as a power-tool when Maven works
> best as a standardisation tool.
> Increasingly thinking that we should decouple the site from the
> components. Reports would then be tied to builds, so as part of this
> release, Net would be building a small number of Reports and putting
> them under a versioned space. The site would then link into them much
> the same way it does the downloads.
>>Anyway, the site is deployed.  It's gradually pushing itself out to all
>>the servers.
> Just the one server I think :) The site is rsync'd every hour or two
> to 'ajax' in Europe. The distributables however are mirrored.
> Hen
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message