On 10/17/07, Costin Manolache <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But if you want to create a maven build file ( or a Makefile, or > eclipse/netbeans projects, etc :-) that builds tomcat - I personally don't > see a problem with that - as long as it doesn't require moving code around > and can play nicely with the current code layout and other build tools. I > think the 'official' way to build tomcat should remain ant ( at least until > any potential replacement has a large mileage ), but having other alternate > build tools can't hurt.
I apologize if I made this discussion seem like an all-or-nothing dictatorship. This effort could be a huge all-at-once change, or a gradual migration towards Maven. The two can also co-exist well together, accommodating both Maven and Ant users. I hereby encourage all developers not only to vote +1 or -1, but also offer why they feel that way. If you feel it should be a +1, but have some reservations as to "how" it is to be done, by all means share that too. If you're thinking "+1, but only if _____ .", please let everyone know instead of voting -1. > I'm quite happy using mostly eclipse - I hardly ever use ant ( mostly to > generate jars and move code around ), the auto-recompilation and fast > run/debug/hot-replace in eclipse are saving me a lot of time, but if > something faster emerges I'll try it. > Costin > -1 I suppose many of us use eclipse, and any disparate build process in many ways hinders that comfy, rapid IDE development we prefer to enjoy. I agree that the automation the IDE provides is vital to development, and have found many ways to keep Maven in line with that. Would you vote +1 for a slightly more refined co-existence with Maven 2 rather than a blatant full-replacement? Would you vote +1 for full-replacement provided it gives you unhindered, Eclipse-friendly flexibility? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
