> but I think there's tremendous value in imposing some sort of > standard build lifecycle and directory structure, not to mention > transitive > dependency management.
Sure - but in my opinion this shouldn't be imposed by a web application framework. I should be able to decide whether to use Maven in my project and not Tapestry. What if I'm not allowed to use Maven in a company. I worked on a project that for security reasons didn't allow any stuff being downloaded onto a developer's workstation from the internet. I want to be able just to grab the required libraries and setup my project as I see fit. This insulates me from things like; the repositories being unreachable, faulty new versions of plugins, etc. etc. Howard, please... respond. -J. > I wasn't a very big fan of Maven 1, but I really like Maven 2. I've spent > a > couple of days in the aggregate tearing my hair out over various Maven 2 > quirks, but I think there's tremendous value in imposing some sort of > standard build lifecycle and directory structure, not to mention > transitive > dependency management. > > > On 3/27/07, Borut Bolèina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> Konstantin Ignatyev wrote: >> > http://www.bileblog.org/?p=59 >> This pretty insulting blog was posted on July 17th, 2005. >> >> I share my oppinion with >> http://www.theserverside.com/news/thread.tss?thread_id=44285#227686 >> >> Best, >> Borut >> >> P.S. This thread is a paradox, quite funny. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
