Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #25608 > unrolled thread

Re: Dependency resolution in Java builds

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Dependency resolution in Java builds Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-10 08:16 -0500
    Re: Dependency resolution in Java builds Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-10 23:33 -0500
    Re: Dependency resolution in Java builds Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-10 22:02 -0500

#25608 — Re: Dependency resolution in Java builds

Lew wrote:
>> The highly-touted features of Maven, namely the auto-resolution of
>> dependencies across the Internet, are confusing enough.

Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> You can set it up to use your own repository.

Of course, then it still reaches across the 'net every time something asks for 
a more (or less) version that's not in the local repository.  Without asking, 
and barely telling.

You don't think we tried that?  Thanks for the awesome advice, though!

Lew wrote:
>> Add the pom.xml
>> spaghetti perpetrated by the same numb-nuts who write spaghetti code and
>> your situation gets pathetic indeed.
>>
>> I'm on a project now with Maven builds that we inherited from such
>> incompetents.

Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> It is my impression that Maven is a 90% tool. It make life easier for
> the 90% easiest cases - cases where it is possible to have
> the project follow the Maven philosophy. For the remaining
> 10% the same features that make it easier for the normal cases
> make it real hard. So if the project is tricky, then you
> are probably better of with Ant that is intended as
> a custom build script tool.

Since real-world projects are nearly never simple, I challenge your "90%" 
claim.  I'd be surprised if the number were 10%.  Do you have any evidence for 
that statistic?

The project I'm on isn't even especially complicated, except for the Maven 
builds.  I wish it were based on Ant, but converting back once it's tangled up 
in Maven is not straightforward.  None of us, not even my management (!), is 
happy with Maven.

-- 
Lew
Ceci n'est pas une fenêtre.
.___________.
|###] | [###|
|##/  | *\##|
|#/ * |   \#|
|#----|----#|
||    |  * ||
|o *  |    o|
|_____|_____|
|===========|

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#26144

Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> The 90-10 were not statistical information but magnitude indication.
> Like in 10% of the code use 90% of the time, 90% of the project takes
> 90% of the time and the 10% also takes 90% of the time.
>
> Maven is pretty widely used.
>
> And I know of several projects that are happy using it.
>
> Real world projects can be relative simple in build. I would even
> say that they should be relative simple in build. Complex builds
> are usually a symptom of a bigger problem in the app.
>
> Of course projects with problems, complex builds and Maven not
> working properly is still common.
>
>> The project I'm on isn't even especially complicated, except for the
>> Maven builds. I wish it were based on Ant, but converting back once it's
>> tangled up in Maven is not straightforward. None of us, not even my
>> management (!), is happy with Maven.
>
> Personally I prefer ant over Maven - I like the ability to code
> my build. But from a project perspective coding the build
> is just extra cost.

I'll take a fresh look.

-- 
Lew
Ceci n'est pas une fenêtre.
.___________.
|###] | [###|
|##/  | *\##|
|#/ * |   \#|
|#----|----#|
||    |  * ||
|o *  |    o|
|_____|_____|
|===========|

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26164

On 10-02-2011 08:16, Lew wrote:
> Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> It is my impression that Maven is a 90% tool. It make life easier for
>> the 90% easiest cases - cases where it is possible to have
>> the project follow the Maven philosophy. For the remaining
>> 10% the same features that make it easier for the normal cases
>> make it real hard. So if the project is tricky, then you
>> are probably better of with Ant that is intended as
>> a custom build script tool.
>
> Since real-world projects are nearly never simple, I challenge your
> "90%" claim. I'd be surprised if the number were 10%. Do you have any
> evidence for that statistic?

The 90-10 were not statistical information but magnitude indication.
Like in 10% of the code use 90% of the time, 90% of the project takes
90% of the time and the 10% also takes 90% of the time.

Maven is pretty widely used.

And I know of several projects that are happy using it.

Real world projects can be relative simple in build. I would even
say that they should be relative simple in build. Complex builds
are usually a symptom of a bigger problem in the app.

Of course projects with problems, complex builds and Maven not
working properly is still common.

> The project I'm on isn't even especially complicated, except for the
> Maven builds. I wish it were based on Ant, but converting back once it's
> tangled up in Maven is not straightforward. None of us, not even my
> management (!), is happy with Maven.

Personally I prefer ant over Maven - I like the ability to code
my build. But from a project perspective coding the build
is just extra cost.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web