Thanks for sharing your passions. My thoughts are below...
#1...
A. one "click" has never been a problem for maven. There seems to be a lot
of insinuation that maven requires a lot of config files. I'm not sure where
you are getting this. The only thing that we might need to do is break out
the assembly config. But, that is because it is about packaging artifacts
all together and not about building the individual jars. So, if you are
saying we can't have an assembly config then gimme a break. Your request is
denied because it requires something that is not possible and is not
possible for a rational and organized reason.
B. offline build... never been an issue for maven. So long as you have the
needed jars locally. But this is true of any codebase.
C. Are you referring to the final zipe file structure or the source tree. If
you are referring to the source tree. You will be denied on that one as well
because maven doesn't have dependencies in the local source tree. If you are
talking about the final packaged output... we already demonstrated that with
the current ibatis maven build.
D. HTML Test Reports - Been possible for a long time
E. Coverage Reports - Been possible for a long time
F. Exploded Distributions - Not sure of what you are referring to here. If
you are referring to seeing the final product of the zip file before it is
zipped then that is just a matter of copying all the sources to a folder in
the assembly config. We demonstrated that with the current maven build in
ibatis.
G. Zipped Distro - No problem
H. I don't think this is necessary. We can look into adding the build number
to the META-INF. But, this should be possible.
#2 - Getting up and going in my IDE is a snap because of current IDE
integration. Less than a minute. With Ant. I always have to checkout the
project figure out what the heck people are doing in their ant script
because EVERYONE does something different. Ramp up time sucks. I always
enjoy how people will blend build artifacts with static artifacts. Can't
simply delete the output folder. You always have to make sure you use their
custom wacky ant scripts and hope you don't call the wrong task.
#3 - See #2
"I'm for simplicity over all else. No Ant isn't the best example of a build
tool in history. But it's simple and it works." I am too. That is why i use
maven :D I got tired of trying to figure out everyone's wacky Ant scripts.
I think you need to take your blood pressure medicine. ;-) Maven is an
acceptable build system. Instead of coming out with aggressive posturing,
give your fellow developers the benefit of the doubt. Do you think we would
use it if we thought it was a horrid pile of crap? Everything comes with
it's strengths and weaknesses. I'll take the lack of a build number on the
zip and jar any day over the amount of effort i expel trying to figure out
ant scripts.
Brandon
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 8:36 AM, Clinton Begin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I currently hate Maven with a grand passion. But, I'm open minded and am
> willing to be educated as to why people like it. I will make the same offer
> I made before:
>
> Three requirements:
>
> #1 Create a maven build system for iBATIS that achieves the exact same
> output, which includes:
> - one "click" build -- I'm not exaggerating here, SVN checkout, run
> ant or script...done. NOTHING else.. no config files, no nothing.
- offline build -- no network connection required (perhaps after one
build if it needs to grab dependencies initially)
> - echo arbitrary information to the command line, such as classpath in
> use and current version being built
> - all dependencies must be versioned and organized into developer
> dependencies (/devlib) and runtime/deploy dependencies (/lib)
> - HTML test reports
> - HTML coverage reports
> - exploded distribution
> - zipped distr
> - version number stamped on ibatis JAR file(s) as well as the zip
> distro
> - all achieved by Ant today.
>
> #2 Show that it's simpler than Ant in at least one way. For example:
> - less XML configuration
> - fewer requirements
> - smaller overall source base size
> - more/better compatibility with tools/frameworks/IDEs
> - the current Ant build is 258 lines and integrates and runs from any
> IDE
>
> #3 Show that it does something Ant doesn't. For example:
> - Signs, MD5, and Uploads to Apache dist (with no additional
> dependencies or configuration)
> - ....
>
> I don't think these are unreasonable requirements. In fact if even one is
> missed, it would make me wonder why the hell we'd even bother.
>
> I'm for simplicity over all else. No Ant isn't the best example of a
> build tool in history. But it's simple and it works.
>
> Clinton
>
>
> On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:35 PM, Nathan Maves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > Brandon reply below.....
> >
> > I am completely for using Maven 2 and conforming our source tree to it.
> > There were three issues, iirc, that (if they have not been fixed by the
> > maven crew) will require a bit of compromise or plugin writing.
> >
> > #1 A serial number generator for builds does not easily exist for maven.
> > We had talked about using the svn repo revision number.
> > #2 We tried finding a way to add a date to our deployment zip file.
> > Unfortunately maven did not provide an easy way to access a current date
> > anywhere.
> > #3 There have been issues with the coverage tools combining with the
> > unit test tools. If we ran the unit tests, coverage tests, and also
> > generated reports, the tests would wind up running 3 times.
> >
> > That being said, I think we should tackle these issues and make Maven
> > our build tool. Maven has excellent IDE integration now (IDEA and Netbeans
> > are both good). It makes it a snap to setup projects and get running.
> > Additionally, the Apache nerds have some maven processes that can help us to
> > more easily release software in accordance with Apache requirements.
> >
> > Brandon
> >
> > On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:34 PM, Nathan Maves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > The ideas/requests/demands just keep coming...
> > >
> > > With a clean slate for IB3 I want to propose a few things. I have
> > > been using Maven2 for a while now and even use it in my day to day
> > > development. My first suggestion is to lay out the new source tree to map
> > > to
> > > the maven2 style of convention over configuration. Even if we choose not
> > > to
> > > use Maven as the build/deployment process it is the most logical and
> > > thought
> > > out hierarchy that I have seen.
> > >
> > > On the topic of Maven2 I would like to nominate is as the
> > > build/deployment process. Maven2 offers so many pre-built plugins for
> > > many
> > > useful things from coverage reports to unit test results. If there is
> > > something that Maven2 does not have I am sure we could write a quick
> > > plugin
> > > to get it done. I have also been using a new CI tool with Maven2 (
> > > https://hudson.dev.java.net/ ). Insanely easy to install and
> > > configure. Just reads your pom file from maven and away you go. Like
> > > most
> > > it can poll the svn repo for changes and make snapshots as we commit.
> > >
> > > Let me know what you guys think
> > >
> > > Nathan
> >
> >
> >
>
