Hehe. Wow.

That guy who gathered that data is the Maven founder. It IS his job to get a 
pulse of how Maven users feel about it.

For a guy that claims to have so much experience, you sure don't do your 
homework.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kenneth McDonald [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 4:50 PM
> To: Maven Users List
> Subject: Re: maven is a swamp
> 
> Well, just to make it concrete, I am not a troll. I've been doing dev for
> 20+ years, have lots of
> experience with large projects, etc. etc. If I have to drop names, I was
> associated with one of
> the two main sites of the Human Genome Project.
> 
> I still don't get the complacency at the XML swamp. How is
> <genericTagName>false</genericTagName>
> 
> possibly better than
> 
> <genericTagName>false</>
> 
> which would in turn be better than:
> 
> genericTagName = "false"
> 
> XML is a swamp of undertulized, overused redundancy. Period.
> 
> In response to the person who'd interrogated 2K+ people to see if they
> thought
> XML was overrdone;  Wow, that's really impressive! Where did you find the
> time
> to ask all those people and still get your your job done? Whereas, if I
> ask the five
> people who I know well, and who have to use these tools, the answer is,
> "what
> a bunch of garbage". They HATE XML.
> 
> Still not convinced? What about the simple fact of that that languages
> before, and the
> languages _since_ have not been written in a dialect of XML. If XML were
> such a great
> solution, surely it would have cleared here by now.
> 
> But of course it hasn't. The reasons is because it's a CRAPPY SOLUTION.
> Period. No Line breaks.
> Unless one is writing for ultimate display in the web, XML  SUCKS
> 
> In all the best to have all the people who have responded to this,
> I don't see how you can continue maintain your position,
> Yours,
> Ken
> On Oct 15, 2010, at 8:27 AM, Yanko, Curtis wrote:
> 
> > +1
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > Curt Yanko | Continuous Integration Services | UnitedHealth Group IT
> > Making IT Happen, one build at a time
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brian Smith [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 5:39 AM
> > To: Maven Users List
> > Subject: Re: maven is a swamp
> >
> > I really fail at understanding the XML rage.  Yeah it's verbose.  How's
> > that a problem?  We've had tools with auto complete, auto format and
> > syntax highlighting for well over a decade, we also now have fairly
> > robust GUIs too.  If you're hand editing a 2000 line xml file in a
> green
> > screen terminal you're doing the equivalent of using an abacus and I'm
> > afraid you're not the user new tools ought to be aimed at.
> >
> > XML has a huge ubiquity value.  It might not be the *best* tool for the
> > job for each individual user but it's the only one that is widely
> enough
> > understood to not put an additional learning burden on the user.  When
> I
> > learned Maven I had to grok concepts like dependencyManagement and
> > plugins and phases.  I didn't have to learn XML, I already knew it.  If
> > Maven POMs were written in Python or A.N.Other language/markup I'd have
> > to learn that too.  There are many useful libraries that make it easier
> > to produce GUI tools on top of XML that don't exist for alternatives,
> so
> > we'd have less tooling for POMs.  Tooling and minimising the learning
> > required are good things.
> >
> > The _actual_ problem I see is the lack of "best practise" use for
> > plugins off the beaten track.  The documentation is usually fairly good
> > at telling you how to make a plugin do something, it's less than
> > brilliant at recommending best practises and unless it's one of the
> > mainstream ones covered by the sonatype book it's hard to find.  I've
> > found the best thing to do in those cases is go look at large, open
> > source projects and see how they do it.  Ken's original problem in this
> > thread (and the others he's been getting help with on the scala list)
> > are _nothing_ to do with XML, that is just the target of frustration.
> > They would have happened regardless of the language for POM
> > specification.
> >
> > For us, Maven's killed about 12,000 lines of ant legacy built up over a
> > few years, and also done a drive by on a couple of dozen ivy files,
> > replacing them with one medium size POM declaring dependency versions,
> a
> > dozen small ones declaring dependencies, and a bunch of minimal ones -
> > all with NO bespoke build instructions in.  Using nexus has killed the
> > need to maintain an internal ivy repository which was a real pain in
> the
> > rear, and we can now easily share deliverables with the other couple of
> > hundred developers we have working in the same technologies around the
> > globe.  It's been very painless by comparison to what we were doing
> > before and well worth the switchover.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Brian
> >
> > On 15 October 2010 08:56, <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 3:00 am, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> >>>> A fact to note though is that I've asked over 2k people over the
> >> last two years at talks and in any average crowd the people who care
> >> to have a different format or DSL is around 3%.
> >>
> >> And I one of them :-) I always havent been a friend of XML and I happy
> >
> >> to see the possibilities maven3 offers (although I prefer using gradle
> >
> >> -
> >> bygones)
> >>
> >> What I'm wondering most is - why the heck do you write to the maven
> >> mailinglist how you dislike maven ? Is your intention to convince
> >> people that they are doing bad stuff over the last xxx years ? Is it
> >> just pure boredness ?
> >>
> >> I dont like Ruby or Clojure - what is the reason to bother the
> >> ruby/clojure mailing list that their syntax is apparently horrible ?
> >>
> >> Sorry - I dont get it... If you dont like maven - dont use it... there
> >
> >> are tons of alternatives around.
> >>
> >> Or what point do I miss here ?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > This e-mail, including attachments, may include confidential and/or
> > proprietary information, and may be used only by the person or entity
> > to which it is addressed. If the reader of this e-mail is not the
> intended
> > recipient or his or her authorized agent, the reader is hereby notified
> > that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is
> > prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify
> the
> > sender by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to