Slash Boxes
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • > It pretty much handles everything about a project (managing dependecies, documentation, tests etc.).

    I don't know much about Maven specifically, but your description sounds like a CPAN modules.
    • No, they are not even close to being the same but I can understand why you would say that given my description and not knowing maven. Maven in 3 non-descript words would be a "project management framework". Granted I don't know everything about CPAN either. : )
      • I understand the comment. You said that Maven does managing dependencies, documentation, tests etc. CPAN has a built-in system to manage dependencies and figure out when one thing needs another. CPAN has a built-in standard for how to document things, and that documentation winds up on a standard website. CPAN has built-in mechanisms for testing, and people have built frameworks around CPAN to test what works on what platforms. And CPAN does more.

        In the case of CPAN it does these things in very, very d
    • Yup, read that. However, there are a whole lot of people that like it as well.
    • +10; Maven suffers from the fate of other ambitious development tools:

      1) It imposes its own worldview on How Things Should Work (e.g., only one source tree per 'module') that require you to develop, package or deploy differently.

      2) Hand in hand with that, it's a "drink the kool-aid" project -- you need to know how things work to figure out how they should work. For instance, Ant has a simple way to ask "What targets can I run with this buildfile?" Maven has no useful implementation of such a thing (the list
      • They make no bones about 1 and 2. That is even in the book I am reading on it. So what? Everything imposes its own world view at some level. The book is good which is what got me wondering.
        • The "so what" happens when you want to something outside their proscribed worldview. I don't think tools should impose constraints like that, but YMMV.

          And, of course, all this just applies to the one implementation; there's nothing that says a copy needs to copy all the warts :-)
          • And, of course, all this just applies to the one implementation; there's nothing that says a copy needs to copy all the warts :-)

            That is what I was thinking as well.

    • Plus, the UI blows badly [] as I discovered.

      I've just witnessed several experienced developers at work have their projects delayed by weeks, as they are converting to Maven. Not in one big go. Just the continual rounds of “why is the build broken now?” adding up. To me, the benefits don't seem to outweigh the flaws.

      • I think converting would be difficult. I am starting from scratch though so I don't anticipate those bumps.
        • Oh, these were from-scratch projects too. That's what surprised me. It seems like Maven makes easy stuff hard, and hard stuff downright impossible.