I am with you - I also want to be impolite about that :-)
I see a great idea and poor implementation. This seems like bait and
switch - it has all these nifty things supposedly out of the box
(war, jar, test - all with dependencies figured out), and then you
get screwed in many big and small details.
Still I think the idea has a future (whether it will be called
"maven" or something else, that is done with "kiss" in mind). Right
now the question is whether we want to be guinea pigs for it.
I am still for keeping cayenne-jpa on Maven since this is the way to
learn things and also to test Ant-based POMs that we generate for the
core Cayenne (intended to integrate with everything that's moving :-))
Andrus
On Feb 28, 2006, at 1:16 PM, Ahmed Mohombe wrote:
>> Still it is such a pain to work with.
> Sorry but I can't help myself and and I just don't get(maybe I'm
> getting old for this :) ):
> Everybody knows that Maven it's a great PITA, but still people do
> this to themselfs. I saw incredibly many mavenized projects and
> frustrated users afterwards. These users even report the pain back
> but still they're ignored, and other projects do that again. All
> this just because of few that actually like the maven cr.., and
> offer to voluntarily mavenieze everything that's moving.
>
> Sorry but I'm curious what's next? Injection just for the sake of
> injection when it works greatly without it?
>
> Please forgive my totally impolite style, but this kind of approach
> is everywhere and the "keep it simple..." principle doesn't seem to
> be cool and useful enough these days anymore :(.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Ahmed.
>
>
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Feb 28 2006 - 05:31:33 EST