Sami Siren wrote: > 2007/2/15, Yonik Seeley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> My first impression of maven: >> Pretty websites as part of the build system - cool! And it's >> *great* for starting >> a new project... unit tests automatically run, website is built, >> automatic packaging, jar/war build, everything you need! >> But, it all seems like magic to me... if I want to do something >> different, >> even a minor little change, I don't know where to start. If I want >> to add >> an >> additional compile flag, where does that go??? I have no idea. To >> change >> the >> behavior (like using Java5 source) I need to google and find the magic >> incantation. > > > Are you saying that the first time you tried ant everything was > immediately > clear to you - no need to vistit ant.apache.org ?
[chiming in as one of those that were hurt badly trying to setup a complex project with Maven] Actually that's the exact truth. If you ever were in contact with a build system that has "targets" (e.g. Make), Ant seems very natural, and understanding a simple build.xml is quite straightforward. Of course, when you write your own Ant files you have to look a the docs. But then again, it's quite straightforward. Maven is black magic. Very nice when it works, but so head-banging when it doesn't or when you want to do something that doesn't fit in the "maven way". Maven repositories are a nice thing, but you don't have to change your build to Maven to produce Maven artifacts, nor to use the repositories. Unfortunately, people often think that one cannot come without the other. Ant + Ivy [1] are as powerful and infinitely more flexible. My 0.02 euros Sylvain [1] http://incubator.apache.org/ivy/ -- Sylvain Wallez - http://bluxte.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
