> > it was the idea. > > Sorry, -1 from me ( again ). Sic...
> And that would be the reason for -1. > If a build system requires intrusive changes and forces a particular code > organization - it shouldn't be used. that's maven phylosophy, not so bad. > It is a choice each project can make, some people like intrusive tools :-) Intrusive ? Nope, just maven convention. > I think it is great to have alternative build files - as long as the > build system plays > nicely with others and doesn't set conditions on how we should organize code. > In particular - we have eclipse build support, it would be great to > add idea/netbeans > if anyone can support them - and if you can add maven in the same way ( i.e. > just maven files in a separate dir, without changes to source layout > just because > maven needs them) - no problem with me. I use eclipse with m2eclipse and the support for multi modules is right. Netbeans has a great maven support with mevenide (may be the best) and some co-workers use IDEA and are very happy with its maven support. >From my experience a mavenized project is buildable from command line and with majors IDEs. I've got a decent experiences after converting more than 100 projects from ant to maven and make them as confortable under Eclipse than previously. Using maven and keeping the actual layout will be possible, but will complexify the mvn and poms. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
