On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 4:51 AM Sean Carrick <s...@pekinsoft.com> wrote:
> You have given a very well thought out answer to my message and I > appreciate that. Now, let me ask you this: do you maintain legacy systems > that were built with the Swing Application Framework? If so, were you able > to convert them to using Maven? > No, I have not used SAF. I looked into it, but it was after it's "use by date", so the links and what not weren't really appropriate for someone trying it today. For some reason I really struggle with GUIs. I can not speak to any direct SAF support NB had at an IDE level. I can only posit that, in the end, the SAF is "just a jar file", and at that level, adding SAF support to a Maven project is simply a matter of importing it into your local repository. This is straightforward (and we can discuss it off line if you like). If you have a project you're willing to let me see, I can try and port it for you and document the steps. > While I remain an "Ant devotee," The easiest workaround for dealing with > libraries and teams is to simply set the project up from the very start to > use a dedicated folder for storing libraries. When that is done, there is a > `lib` folder created in the top-level project directory. Anytime that you > or someone else on the team adds a library to the project, that library is > copied to that `lib` folder. If your team is using a repository (if not, I > want to know how changes are tracked ;-)), that `lib` folder is also on > the root of the repository and is copied to any machine that clones the > library. > Back when we were doing this, we simply checked the libraries into SVN so that the project could be mostly stand alone and have a single source of truth. I actually introduced Ant to our group back in the day, at that time I was doing everything in Emacs, and folks were still trying to shoehorn Java projects in to make, which is a bad idea. I had to run around with a wiffle ball bat to prevent developers from just shoving stuff on to the classpath to get stuff to run. We weren't packaging things properly, relying on the CLASSPATH env variable for stuff, etc. It was awful. Ant didn't cause this, but I will say that with Maven and modern packaging, it is rare and far between that I have classpath problems, especially as it was back in the day. I certainly enjoy not having to mess with classpaths. > Also, you said, "My pom.xml file lists 13 direct dependencies. The actual > number of jars that get imported is closer to 50." To me, that is not a > feature, but rather it is a pain in the rear. I want to know, and I mean > *know*, *exactly* what my project's dependencies are. My goal when > designing software is to keep external dependencies at a bare minimum. No, > I do not try to reinvent the wheel in each project, but I like to have > absolute control over dependencies. To that end, when using Any, I have > that control. > You have that control with Maven, but it's more of a "don't include this, and this, and this" vs 'just use this and that and the other". It's more exception based (and the IDE makes this process really easy, as you can just prune entire branches off of the dependency graph in the UI). Maven offers all of that control, I just find I rarely need to exercise it. Which is great when you just want to lazily get stuff done. > As a comparison, I have created a simple "Hello World" project that > contains a single `JFrame` class, using Ant and using Maven. From the > finishing of the New Project Wizard until the project was ready to be run > for the first time, the Ant project took just a few seconds, whereas the > Maven project took well over a minute to complete the background scanning. > When I compiled them into Jar files, the Ant application weighed in at > around 30 KiB, whereas the Maven application weighed in at just over 1 MiB. > So, the Maven project included some "dependencies" that I did not need. I > felt like I had no control at all. > I can't speak to that, I don't know what projects you used. I created a new Java Application, added a New JFrame Form, dragged a label on to it, and, in the end, the jar file I had was < 5K. Plus there are nuances missing from the Maven discussion about default artifacts and how it starts. But, safe to say, my eventual jar file had the NewJFrame class, a manifest and the pom. We can talk abou that off line if you wish as well. > Having said all of that, I will say this: I am not a Luddite and am seeing > the writing on the wall regarding Ant. While I will continue to use it for > my projects, I am working on some things on the side, such as porting the > old JSR-296 AppFramework to JDK-11 and building it based upon Maven. Taking > a page from the BSAF project, I am adding features to that framework, such > as a lightweight docking library (pure Java, no outside dependencies). I am > hoping that the legacy projects built on the SAF will then be able to be > successfully ported off of the Ant build system and into the Maven realm... > Honestly, this is a great opportunity to delve a bit deeper into Maven. Simply, if you plan on breathing a little life into SAF, publishing it as a Maven artifact to Maven Central opens it up to an astonishing number of developers. Do not discount how easy it is for folks to fire up "hello world" projects using Maven. Regards, Will Hartung
