Ortwin Glück wrote:
> Nobody needs Ant when there is Maven. Ant is legacy. Lots of people, including me, disagree with this. Lots of people, including me, find maven a pain to work with. Ant support needs to be maintained
Its also the case that not all commons projects use maven for everything. On [collections] I use maven for the website, but recommend and fully maintain ant for building. It would simply not be practical to attempt to do some of the things I do with ant in maven. Maven is not up to the task.
My point is that simply because something new exists, does not necessarily mean that it is better or should be used for everything. IMHO, maven is great at building websites, and lousy at building jars and distributions (in the way I want them to be built).
For httpclient, I don't mind if you use the maven ant plugin, or you hand code the ant script (as collections does). Just don't store the jars in the SVN.
Stephen
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
