Hi Pierce,
Pierce T. Wetter III wrote:
>
> On Jul 9, 2008, at 10:11 AM, Anjo Krank wrote:
>
>> Note: I don't think LOC is a good metric, but what the heck. Also, I'm
>> not really interested in this discussion. I wouldn't participate if
>> not for these unfounded claims you made.
>
> Sorry, I agree that LOC isn't a good metric. I especially think that
> I'd rather have 2000 lines of easily readable code then 1000 lines of
> unreadable code.
Cannot agree more.
Cheers,
Henrique
>
> But a well founded claim of mine is that I'm a lot farther along in
> understanding maven builds then I've ever been with Ant builds. So far
> I've read 2 Ant books, and 0 maven books. So like the title says, I'm
> more optimistic about maven then I was last week.
>>
>> I gave an example for a project ant build file and do not see how this
>> is complicated at all. One may argue that docs on the trizillion
>> properties is lacking, but haven't seen anyone asking on the list so
>> far, so I can only assume they work well for everybody who is interested.
>
> Your example consists of variants of:
>
> <ant antFile="Build/build/build.xml" target="${project.name}.all"
> dir="../../../">
> <property name="build.action" value="install" />
> </ant>
>
> Which means that to understand it, I have to then go into
> Build/build/build.xml and figure out how things change based on the
> value of build.action. So I see this as a false simplicity. Our current
> build works exactly this way, and essentially I have to step through
> everything in build.xml and generic.xml in my mind to make sure they're
> doing the right things with the current values.
>
>>
>>
>>>> Fourth, adding a project typically requires five lines in
>>>> Build/build/build.xml to add it to the correct group and some props.
>>>> I might consider moving these props from the build file to a
>>>> build.properties and making Build/build/build.xml only specify the
>>>> inter-related deps.
>>>
>>> Except you have to add the build dependencies somewhere as well,
>>> which if you want to compare apples/oranges, you really have to count
>>> right? You also have to count the information in build.properties.
>>> The information in the pom.xml file for a new project without
>>> dependencies is more then 5 lines, its like 10 lines, but 5 of those
>>> name the project so you can reference it elsewhere and the other 5
>>> reference the super-pom
>>
>> My top-level stuff for the project group(s) is also only a few lines.
>
> Same here. That wasn't quite what I was saying, I was saying that the
> minimum pom.xml file can be quite short as well.
>>
>>
>> But whatever: where is the maven dual build of Wonder with 5.4 and 5.3?
>
> Again, you're asking the wrong person, I'm just learning maven. Right
> now, "woversion" is a parameter to the top level pom.xml, so presumably
> it would be possible to build it both ways. Or even better, against all
> the Apple nightly build snapshots. But I don't know how to do that yet.
>>
>> Never mind. This is my last post on this topic, maven users may find
>> peace and prosperity wherever they thread.
>
> There's no reason the maven/Ant builds can't be complimentary. It's
> always good to have options.
>
> Pierce
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Wed Jul 09 2008 - 23:45:51 EDT