Sylvain Wallez wrote: > And this actually endangers these other projects by forbidding their > developers from concentrating on actual productive work. Cocoon with all > its dependencies is certainly an extreme use case for Maven compared to > all others, and broken builds led some of Cocoon's major contributors to > not even try 2.2 for months. And now we're wondering if users will even > be able to build Cocoon if they dare to download it. The project is in > danger.
If more people find that maven2 is largely responsible for Cocoon's current impasse then we should take this very serious and really consider switching back to Ant. > I discussed with several people from other projects at ApacheCon and > they all report the same kind of problems: non-repeatability of builds. > It works one day, but not the day after without anything having changed. This whole idea of 'my build failed and i didn't change anything' is just not sustainable anymore with maven2 connecting to a relatively volatile repo with thousands of artifacts. People should realize that poms can get updated, corrected, broken, moved, deleted without prior warning. Admitted this is less true for releases but very true for snapshots. > Maven has gained a lot of mindshare because everybody's talking about Maven2 does a bit more than Ant, this should be clear by now to most people. Whether we need this 'bit more' or not was perhaps not considered enough when we voted to switch to maven2. > it. Does everybody talk about their Ant build system? No, because it > just works. ... or because they haven't released anything in over a year. Depends on how you look at it i guess. Regards Jorg
