My comments should not hold up this junit case. ...
I don't think we need to see any maven case-- I was just stating what is fairly common development practice which makes installation of junit and many other libraries a moot issue: one writes a maven build script (pom) and it automatically sucks down the right versions of everything from maven repositories. NetBeans also directly supports maven pom files, so even there the need for installed libraries like junit goes away. I agree with other comments that there is still a place for installation of various libraries like junit (so long as multiple versions are supported, otherwise I think it is impractical). But in all the development I do (work and home), I use maven, and I don't have to bother. It's far more elegant to have the maven build pull down the right version as needed than having to install and maintain versions of (for example) junit. Lloyd .............................................. Lloyd Chambers lloyd.chambers at sun.com GlassFish team, LSARC member On Oct 27, 2008, at 1:01 PM, Dean Roehrich wrote: > On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 11:55:58AM -0700, Lloyd Chambers wrote: >> Maven has versioned dependencies. So long as junit is in a repository >> (and it is), *no install is needed*; the build process picks it up >> automatically (and puts it into the local maven repository). Ten >> versions? No problem. > > So the local maven repository can contain multiple versions of > junit? Does > this mean some ARC cases are backwards--that we need to see the > Maven case > before we see Junit? > > Dean
