Raible Designs

« PHP vs. Java - which... | Main | On Vacation... »

Friday August 22, 2003

Maven vs. Ant I presented my views on why we should use Maven over Ant today in a meeting. My basic reasons are simple: 1) the ability to download jars (and have a central repository for all projects) and 2) to have a standard directory structure and build/test/deploy mechanism. It's going over like a fart in a crowded room so far. The major pushback is because supposedly you can convert JBuilder's .jqx files to Ant build files. Has anyone does this? How does it work? They mentioned that if there is a converter for .jqx -> maven build files, then they'd be happy to try it.

If we do use Ant (high probability), now begins the arduous task of standardizing across projects, as well as creating a "lib" module in CVS to store all the jars for the different projects. Good thing I'm on vacation next week! ;-) Posted in Java at Aug 22 2003, 04:13:54 PM MDT 9 Comments

Comments:

Don't use a common lib directory. Let each project have its own lib directory which is checked into CVS under $project/lib. It should be possible for different projects to upgrade to new libraries independent of other projects.

Posted by reader on August 22, 2003 at 06:14 PM MDT #

We bought a book about ant, looked at it's chaper on standards, adopted them and never went back. ant is so easy to use and install. Maven is a nightmare to install and get working. I can understand why it went over like a fart in a crowded room. You obviously work with some very smart people. :)

Posted by No one on August 22, 2003 at 08:04 PM MDT #

You can always use the get task to retrieve the jars. Not has swish as using maven but it works well enough.

Posted by Glen Stampoultzis on August 22, 2003 at 08:29 PM MDT #

I've used Ant for years - and I do love it. But is it the answer for managing multiple projects with the same dependencies? The truth is, we all have our preferences - and to be honest, I prefer Ant. However, in a situation where we have 50+ projects - it sounds like a real pain in the ass to <em>standardize</em> on a <code>build.xml</code> file, rather than just using Maven - which already has its standard tasks built in. I'm just trying to do what's easiest for the developers. I know Ant, and I feel like I know it well - but I don't want to maintain 50+ build files.

Posted by Matt Raible on August 22, 2003 at 10:19 PM MDT #

use Greebo Luke :-) it works to allow using maven-like JAR repsitories from ANT. then standarize on ant targets and your goals are met.

Posted by Aleksander Slominski on August 23, 2003 at 02:18 PM MDT #

I seem to be in a similar boat as you (Matt). I however am not very familiar with either Ant or Maven. At this point I am leaning toward Ant due mainly in part to the fact that it is incorporated with JBuilder. In my situation I have one site (an Intranet) that I would like to divide into seperate projects and use either ant or maven to build these projects and create a war file is this what they are meant for or am I off base with my thinking?

Posted by Shawn on December 30, 2003 at 02:10 PM MST #

I use both Ant and Maven on a couple of different projects. On the projects that I use Ant, I try to use AppFuse, and then I get a standard build file throughout my projects. I see no reason to migrate AppFuse to Maven.

Posted by Matt Raible on December 30, 2003 at 02:19 PM MST #

I was introduced to maven a about a year back and before i had used Ant for a few years. I personally believe once uve got the hang of maven its heaps better simply because it automates all lot of stuff. From creating skeleton project to deploying the archives in the remote repository, to doing releases. Its awesome. My favorite thing about maven is its local and remote repository system.

Posted by Rishabh2u on October 15, 2008 at 06:06 PM MDT #

Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
« December 2008
	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28	29	30	31

Today

Search This Site

Recent Entries

Tag Cloud

Navigation