Maybe let's stabilize XML and ensure we can make it evolving properly in
time before supporting any other format which will impact negatively the
ecosystem IMHO since a lot of descriptor parsers are not org.apache.maven
(which is a very good thing IMHO, means we have a portable enough format to
be adopted).
Once we will tackle that support question I think the main point is which
formats do we want to maintain (support is not a big deal, maintaining is).
While I can envision xml and maybe json are no drama, any other one will
probably end as polyglot, kind of abandonned they restarted then
re-abandonned so from my window I don't see it as great for the community
("good bad idea" we sometimes say).Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> Le mer. 7 juin 2023 à 18:02, Guillaume Nodet <gno...@apache.org> a écrit : > A very rough cut at supporting HOCON is available at > https://github.com/gnodet/maven-hocon-extension. It currently requires > https://github.com/gnodet/maven/tree/polyglot (mainly to add the maven > model as an attached artifact during the build so that it can be consumed > by the hocon parser generator). The generated parser does not handle the > whole model yet, so it's very experimental (and an important part of it is > the plugin configuration which is... xml). A very simple parseable POM is > available at > > https://github.com/gnodet/maven-hocon-extension/blob/main/src/it/simple/pom.conf > . If people are actually interested in that, we may be able to move it as > an official maven extension. > > Note that takari-polyglot is broken with maven 4 and the above parser is > only for maven 4... > > Anyway, I'm all for moving maven forward ! > > Guillaume > > Le mer. 7 juin 2023 à 02:31, Hunter C Payne > <hunterpayne2...@yahoo.com.invalid> a écrit : > > > I completely agree that JSON is just reinventing the wheel. But that > > seems irrelevant from a marketing perspective. And HOCON is actually > > better than either JSON or XML. If your potential customers first > reaction > > to Maven is 'ick XML' then it doesn't really matter if XML is better. > Just > > my experience and opinion. > > > > Hunter > > On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 05:24:59 PM PDT, Gary Gregory < > > garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Playing a bit of devil's advocate here: while I've not used it, there > is a > > maven polyglot plugin that IIRC let's you author your POM in other > formats. > > But yeah, XML can be a pain but XML Schema is super handy in tooling and > > editors. In the meantime, JSON is just reinventing the wheel... > > > > Gary > > > > On Tue, Jun 6, 2023, 20:02 Hunter C Payne <hunterpayne2...@yahoo.com > > .invalid> > > wrote: > > > > > Sorry to be glib. I apologize. But I did have a point. The attitude > > > that Guillaume has about my emacs (which has been updated more recently > > > than either the JVM or your IDE) is exactly the same attitude I face > > when I > > > try to get new users to use Maven. In the case of Maven, it is use of > > XML > > > for the pom, in the case of emacs its all the weird key bindings (which > > you > > > actually already know because of bash). I hope this actually helps. > > > > > > Hunter > > > > > > On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 04:42:10 PM PDT, Hunter C Payne < > > > hunterpayne2...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > Ok, sonny...go back to using software I wrote to do your development. > > > Hunter > > > > > > On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 03:47:56 PM PDT, Guillaume Nodet < > > > gno...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > Sounds like the only really plausible answer ! So if they can stay > on a > > > runtime which is 10 years old, an editor which has been released nearly > > 38 > > > years ago (well, not the latest version of course, but still...), why > > can't > > > they stay on maven 3.9 which is a few months old ? > > > > > > My proposal was to support critical bug fixes (i.e. security or no > > > work-around, but that can always be discussed) on the latest branches > > > supporting LTS JDK for some time..., so 3.x for JDK 8, 4.x for JDK 17 > and > > > maybe 5.x for JDK 21 or 24 or whatever the LTS jdk would be at that > time. > > > That would be a change from what has been done for the past 15 years, > as > > > looking at history, I think 2.0.11 was the only micro version ever > > released > > > after the next minor version. > > > > > > Guillaume > > > > > > Le mar. 6 juin 2023 à 23:05, Hunter C Payne > > > <hunterpayne2...@yahoo.com.invalid> a écrit : > > > > > > > emacs > > > > Hunter > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 11:19:43 AM PDT, Guillaume Nodet < > > > > gno...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > One question for people that want JDK 8 support. What IDE do they > use > > > to > > > > develop ? Because none of the actual IDE is running JDK 8, though > they > > > can > > > > be used by JDK 8, just like maven with toolchains. > > > > So really, the argument does not really stand, but for the very > > minority > > > of > > > > devs still using emacs/vim. > > > > It really comes down to ease of use (i.e. not having to use --release > > > flag > > > > or to setup a toolchain) vs staying on JDK for 10 more years. > > > > > > > > Le mar. 6 juin 2023 à 18:32, Michael Osipov <micha...@apache.org> a > > > écrit > > > > : > > > > > > > > > Am 2023-06-06 um 07:42 schrieb Hervé Boutemy: > > > > > > it's not about *one not wanting* to upgrade (anybody can use JDK > 17 > > > if > > > > > they want currently) > > > > > > > > > > > > it's about *one forcing everybody else* to upgrade (and enter the > > > > > toolchain setup question) > > > > > > > > > > EXACTLY! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > ------------------------ > > > > Guillaume Nodet > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > ------------------------ > > > Guillaume Nodet > > > > > > > > > -- > ------------------------ > Guillaume Nodet >
