lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Groschupf>
Subject Re: [ANNOUNCE] Katta 0.5 released
Date Fri, 10 Apr 2009 05:34:52 GMT
Hi Steve,

I dont like sitting a build system, so I like convention over  
configuration. Maven sounds good for that, but after many years being  
a maven fan I just could not understand why essential plugins are  
still so buggy and why I have to spend so much energy when I want to  
customize something.  Obviously maven describes the project, it is not  
a build script. Also I like dependency management.
Gradle will be a great build tool. It has conventions over  
configuration it uses java syntax (groovy) to write the build scrip,  
has dependency management etc. It is actually really cool but we  
adapted it too early.
It had bugs that blocked our productivity.
Now we are back at ant and use ivy for dependency management. Ivy isnt  
great documented but works pretty solid for us. Ant is solid though I  
dont like to writing scripts in a declarative language - xml and also  
ants multi projects build capabilities aren't the greatest. Anyhow we  
decided for ant since it is a solid working horse.


Hadoop training and consulting

On Apr 9, 2009, at 9:50 AM, Steven A Rowe wrote:

> Oops, just saw on the wiki that "Gradle" (never heard of it before)  
> is the build system (former build system, I gather from the release  
> announcement) - I'm still interested in why the switch was made,  
> though. - Steve
> On 4/9/2009 at 12:22 PM, Steven A Rowe wrote:
>> On 4/9/2009 at 3:16 AM, Stefan Groschupf wrote:
>>> Release 0.5 of Katta is now available.
>> Congratulations on the release!
>>> [...] switched to Ant and Ivy as a build system [...]
>> AFAICT, the build previously was performed with Maven 2 - is there a
>> public discussion available anywhere concerning this switch?  (I  
>> looked
>> and couldn't find anything.)  If there's no public discussion
>> available, can you say a few words about the rationale behind the
>> switch?

View raw message