On 10 January 2014 15:02, Ron Wheeler <rwhee...@artifact-software.com>wrote:
> I am not sure that I agree with this section of https://cwiki.apache.org/ > confluence/display/MAVEN/Project+Description+Contest* > "Note: *this does not preclude us from including a "feature comparison > matrix" page somewhere in our site... but we should recognise that such a > matrix would likely be biased by our philosophy, which most likely negates > the utility of hosting such a page on our site. Let us leave the feature > comparison matrices to those that have no axe to grind (and spend our > energy ensuring that their matrices are fair to us, just as other solutions > in this space should be doing for the representation of their tools on such > matrices)" > > There may be some value is writing the comparison from a Maven point of > view. > It does give a chance to describe where there are differences and why they > are important from the POV of the "Maven way". Maven is based on certain > beliefs about the way software should be developed and built. As most > politicians can tell you, it is better to define yourself than have someone > else define you. > It is most uncertain that third parties will give the same weighting to > the value of certain practices and features that the Maven community would. > It is clear from the discussions in this forum, that it is easy to get off > to a shaky start when first trying to use Maven. A person doing a quick > evaluation of development tools could easily bring with them some > assumptions about software development processes and come up with a very > distorted view of Maven. > > I think that an accurate product comparison written from the maven POV is > fair and useful for someone coming to Maven for the first time. It will > highlight things that Maven does that other systems don't do as well and > there is no reason to exclude things where Ant is better and explain why > the Maven community does not consider that a deal breaker. > > Such a comparison should not be on the first page people land on. If we can come up with a comparison that we think is fair to all, even if comparing on our best feature set, then that is fine. The point I was making in that "note" is that excluding mentioning the competition in the project description does not mean we are excluding mentioning them at all. The second point is that there is an argument against having such a comparison chart anyway... but if we have one that we think is fair to all and reflects our philosophy then that is fine... not priority #1, #2 or #3 for a re-design of the maven site > Ron > > -- > Ron Wheeler > President > Artifact Software Inc > email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com > skype: ronaldmwheeler > phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 > >
