I guess that we all Anti-Ant Maveniacs better keep quiet when an IDEAlist as passionate as Hani tells so ;) We better wait for GUI builder support in Aurora.
Seriously, as much as Ant changed the world where make was used to build software, Maven is doing the same in a Ant dominated hemisphere in a friendly cooperative integrated fashion. I just hope that more and more people will try Maven, reactor, Ant integration, Jelly, XDoclet plugin, and hundreds of other plugins and see amazing things done automatically. There's so much magic in it. Just like IDEA understands Java, Maven understands software building. Things will get much better when someone writes plugin to synchronize maven project files with IDEA. Ant's not bad to build ant-hills, but if you try to build something more solid, the result is still so much like ant-hill - vulnerable and messy. Maven has to reach release 1.0 and stabilize a bit its POM, get rid of some wrinkles.
The best dream is that right after Christmas 2003 we'll see Maven on the blueprint of the next IDEA.
As for GUI builder, wouldn't it be nice to go for one on the server side, possibly supporting JavaServer Faces, JSTL, JSR 168 portlets, XSLT? Standard LEGO blocks seem to be already invented, let's start the game.
I've had nothing but negative experiences with maven. Things like circular dependencies, bizarre versioning, old cvs versions, a truly horrific mix and match of release and alpha and beta software.
Any sane person would think 'let me reduce my external deps if they're becoming a problem', only jakarta would come up with something as dumb as 'let me write an incredibly complex too to let me increase my dependencies'.
The attitude of maven developers doesn't help either, here's a conversation I had with one..
me: Why does maven force me to define JAVA_HOME in OSX, when ant doesn't, and no other app does?
him: because you need to define JAVA_HOME, it's considered good practice
me: but JAVA_HOME is in a specific location on OSX, there's no need for users to be aware of it or forced to specify it.
him: then OSX is broken. tell them to fix their JDK. Everyone must define JAVA_HOME.
Maven to me is proof that some people really do have far too much time on their hands and far too little real work to be done. What a great world it'd be if all that energy (and sometimes ability) were to be channeled into something useful.
Especially the one about how Maven is bad bacause you need an environment variable.
I love Maven, I find that it eases the task of building software, tying together the documentation, the metrics, the tests and code.
I love the fact that all I have to do is tell Maven a little bit about my project, and then Maven takes care of the rest.
For those interested, Maven actually has an Idea plugin. Typing "maven idea" will generate an Idea project file (alas, a little flawed at the moment, but almost right).
Hani's argument was not that maven is bad because it needs an environment variable (by the way: he's right, noone should need to specify JAVA_HOME os OSX). He's just showing the general attitude of maven developers.
Now, I'm risking a bit here, since I'm part of a project that is currently using maven, but... hell, maven is so complex it scares me. All the project and dependencies declarations, rules, plugins and all that... what's wrong with plain ant files?
Maven tries to be a declarative project building tool, while ant is a more of a programmatic tool. However, I don't think any building tool should be declarative. Project building is a processes, sometimes long and complex, that's better expressed in a programmatic way. Yeah, I know about jelly scripting. But then aren't we just going back to programmatic building, back to the Ant way of things?
However, things may change in the future. Maybe xdoclet's use of maven may clear up my mind and make me see what's really good about maven. But for now, I'm sticking to plain ant build files.
Thank you! You've hit the nail on the head. A build tool should be concise and clear. People like maven because it does a lot of 'magic', I dislike it for exactly that reason. I like clear straightforward build processes.
Maven's idea of a repository also seems very backwards, it's like a fancier global CLASSPATH, which anyone who has done java dev for more than a few months can tell you is a terrible idea.
xdoclet's build approach IMHO is the right one for those who desperately need to use maven. Maven is there to keep the mavenites happy, but if all you want to do is make a standard build without docs or any maven features (whatever they may be), then you can use ant and it all works nicely.
It sounds like we just have different views on what a build tool should do.
I like a tool that lets me worry about programming, not building. You seem to like finer control over the build process.
I do find ant more useful than make; but I don't think it is all that great. Big, unreadable xml-files, IMHO, but that does not mean that I disapprove of the ant integration in IDEA -- I just dont use it (much).
I think Maven integration will be worth a lot to those of us the use/like Maven, and not so much for everyone else ;)
If we should fight anything in the nex IDEA it should be the GUI-builder, bawh!
As a longtime Ant user now converted to Maven, and a longtime Eclipse user now converted to IDEA, I was also wondering if any plans where in progress to integrate running maven scripts out of Intellij in a similar manner to the current Ant support ?
For now you can happily define some external tools to execute your maven targets. Also, take a look at the Maven Plugin[/url], that may suffice your needs.
Please please do not waste time adding maven support.
I guess that we all Anti-Ant Maveniacs better keep quiet when an IDEAlist as
passionate as Hani tells so ;)
We better wait for GUI builder support in Aurora.
Seriously, as much as Ant changed the world where make was used to build
software, Maven is doing the same in a Ant dominated hemisphere in a
friendly cooperative integrated fashion. I just hope that more and more
people will try Maven, reactor, Ant integration, Jelly, XDoclet plugin, and
hundreds of other plugins and see amazing things done automatically. There's
so much magic in it. Just like IDEA understands Java, Maven understands
software building. Things will get much better when someone writes plugin to
synchronize maven project files with IDEA. Ant's not bad to build ant-hills,
but if you try to build something more solid, the result is still so much
like ant-hill - vulnerable and messy. Maven has to reach release 1.0 and
stabilize a bit its POM, get rid of some wrinkles.
Some propaganda links at http://213.190.42.244/whisper/space/Maven
The best dream is that right after Christmas 2003 we'll see Maven on the
blueprint of the next IDEA.
As for GUI builder, wouldn't it be nice to go for one on the server side,
possibly supporting JavaServer Faces, JSTL, JSR 168 portlets, XSLT? Standard
LEGO blocks seem to be already invented, let's start the game.
--
Edmundas
Whispering at http://213.190.42.244/whisper/space/start
"Hani Suleiman" <hani@formicary.net> wrote in message
news:31639126.1050176622710.JavaMail.javamailuser@localhost...
yuck yuck yuck.
maven is a horrible bloated solution to a problem. See http://www.mail-archive.com/opensymphony-webwork@lists.sourceforge.net/msg01313.html for a more specific rant (yes, a rant!) about why maven sucks.
I've had nothing but negative experiences with maven. Things like circular dependencies, bizarre versioning, old cvs versions, a truly horrific mix and match of release and alpha and beta software.
Any sane person would think 'let me reduce my external deps if they're becoming a problem', only jakarta would come up with something as dumb as 'let me write an incredibly complex too to let me increase my dependencies'.
The attitude of maven developers doesn't help either, here's a conversation I had with one..
me: Why does maven force me to define JAVA_HOME in OSX, when ant doesn't, and no other app does?
him: because you need to define JAVA_HOME, it's considered good practice
me: but JAVA_HOME is in a specific location on OSX, there's no need for users to be aware of it or forced to specify it.
him: then OSX is broken. tell them to fix their JDK. Everyone must define JAVA_HOME.
Maven to me is proof that some people really do have far too much time on their hands and far too little real work to be done. What a great world it'd be if all that energy (and sometimes ability) were to be channeled into something useful.
Wow, great arguments..
Especially the one about how Maven is bad bacause you need an environment variable.
I love Maven, I find that it eases the task of building software, tying together the documentation, the metrics, the tests and code.
I love the fact that all I have to do is tell Maven a little bit about my project, and then Maven takes care of the rest.
For those interested, Maven actually has an Idea plugin. Typing "maven idea" will generate an Idea project file (alas, a little flawed at the moment, but almost right).
- Jake
Hani's argument was not that maven is bad because it needs an environment variable (by the way: he's right, noone should need to specify JAVA_HOME os OSX). He's just showing the general attitude of maven developers.
Now, I'm risking a bit here, since I'm part of a project that is currently using maven, but... hell, maven is so complex it scares me. All the project and dependencies declarations, rules, plugins and all that... what's wrong with plain ant files?
Maven tries to be a declarative project building tool, while ant is a more of a programmatic tool. However, I don't think any building tool should be declarative. Project building is a processes, sometimes long and complex, that's better expressed in a programmatic way. Yeah, I know about jelly scripting. But then aren't we just going back to programmatic building, back to the Ant way of things?
However, things may change in the future. Maybe xdoclet's use of maven may clear up my mind and make me see what's really good about maven. But for now, I'm sticking to plain ant build files.
Thank you! You've hit the nail on the head. A build tool should be concise and clear. People like maven because it does a lot of 'magic', I dislike it for exactly that reason. I like clear straightforward build processes.
Maven's idea of a repository also seems very backwards, it's like a fancier global CLASSPATH, which anyone who has done java dev for more than a few months can tell you is a terrible idea.
xdoclet's build approach IMHO is the right one for those who desperately need to use maven. Maven is there to keep the mavenites happy, but if all you want to do is make a standard build without docs or any maven features (whatever they may be), then you can use ant and it all works nicely.
It sounds like we just have different views on what a build tool should do.
I like a tool that lets me worry about programming, not building. You seem to like finer control over the build process.
I do find ant more useful than make; but I don't think it is all that great. Big, unreadable xml-files, IMHO, but that does not mean that I disapprove of the ant integration in IDEA -- I just dont use it (much).
I think Maven integration will be worth a lot to those of us the use/like Maven, and not so much for everyone else ;)
If we should fight anything in the nex IDEA it should be the GUI-builder, bawh!
- Jake
I'm all for a GUI-Builder. Having seen the ground that's been broken with IDEA, can't wait to see what they come up with for the GUI-Builder ....
As a longtime Ant user now converted to Maven, and a longtime Eclipse user now converted to IDEA, I was also wondering if any plans where in progress to integrate running maven scripts out of Intellij in a similar manner to the current Ant support ?
For now you can happily define some external tools to execute your maven targets. Also, take a look at the Maven Plugin[/url], that may suffice your needs.