Sadly, the headline also left out the rather key information that this tool is for Java projects only.
I was quite looking forward to a revolutionary project management tool... alas, this one is yet another myopic product of the "Java is the whole universe" generation.
Java is great... but there is a larger world out there you know.
Not true. It uses ant, ant can do anything (think of it as a replacement for make). People here build C, C++ and a bunch of other stuff using ant. With the correct modules you wrap all that up (with your Java components) into one nicely managed project.
Sure it's written _in_ Java, but it's not just _for_ Java (but naturally, the user community is heavily biased in that direction).
What, exactly, do maven or ant buy which make does not provide? They are written in a slow, ugly, unpleasant language, yes. They use XML instead of decent flat text, yes. They lack the great library of tools which have grown up around make, yes. Why would I want this, again? I will grant that make's use of <tab> is an abomination, but other than that it's a damned good tool which does a damned good job.
Idiot Java/XML heads constantly re-inventing the wheel.
Idiot luddites refusing to see progress when it smacks them in the face.
What, then, is the progress? As I asked in my post, 'what, exactly, do maven or ant buy which make does not provide?' As I noted, they are written in an ugly language; they use an ugly syntax (XML has all the bad points of S-expressions and few of the good); they do not work with auto*. I did note that make has a bad point.
I also looked at a few sites trying to get an answer. As far as I can see, switching to maven or ant buys m
Another downside to make: People often start with the false assumption that Makefiles are automatically cross-platform, and then find out that they aren't.
Also, make/automake/autoconf/autoheader/... can be quite complicated and confusing. Whereas ant (and presumably maven) are pretty simple by comparison.
"With molasses you catch flies, with vinegar you catch nobody."
-- Baltimore City Councilman Dominic DiPietro
Link to project (Score:5, Informative)
http://maven.apache.org/ [apache.org]
Not the only thing left out: it's for Java only (Score:5, Informative)
I was quite looking forward to a revolutionary project management tool
Java is great
Re:Not the only thing left out: it's for Java only (Score:5, Informative)
Sure it's written _in_ Java, but it's not just _for_ Java (but naturally, the user community is heavily biased in that direction).
Re:Not the only thing left out: it's for Java only (Score:2)
Idiot Java/XML heads constantly re-inventing the wheel.
Re:Not the only thing left out: it's for Java only (Score:2)
Idiot luddites refusing to see progress when it smacks them in the face.
Re:Not the only thing left out: it's for Java only (Score:2)
What, then, is the progress? As I asked in my post, 'what, exactly, do maven or ant buy which make does not provide?' As I noted, they are written in an ugly language; they use an ugly syntax (XML has all the bad points of S-expressions and few of the good); they do not work with auto*. I did note that make has a bad point.
I also looked at a few sites trying to get an answer. As far as I can see, switching to maven or ant buys m
Re:Not the only thing left out: it's for Java only (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, make/automake/autoconf/autoheader/... can be quite complicated and confusing. Whereas ant (and presumably maven) are pretty simple by comparison.