Giacomo Pati dijo: > But first we need to come to a consensus about which build > infrastructure we would support to use: > > 1) Ant > in this case we can use the current build system and tune it to the > needs we have for the 2.2 and maybe add some ruper task to get rid > of jars in our repository (suggested by Nicola Ken IIRC) and some > more for modularisation ease > > 2) Centipede > in this case I could not volunteer as I'm out of Centipede since > their move from Cents to Antlibs (we still have some customer > project using a Cents based version of it but they will never move > to Antlibs) > > 3) Maven > ATM this is my preferred build infrastructure and I could help > building the 2.2 repo based on it
Hi: I think this Ant vs. (Centipede or Maven) is a not fair comparation. Check this: http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-maven/ >From the above document: <snip> A Maven goal can contain any valid Ant task in its definition, which will help you quickly learn Maven and protect your Ant investments. </snip> Then Ant can be present in the 3 options presented. I share with you the need to move to a better project management. In that case I think the question is related to Centiped vs. Maven. With this options presented, my vote is: Maven +1 Best Regards, Antonio Gallardo.
