Yes. But I claim that adding mvnw to the picture makes things more complicated for the typical user, because there are now more options to understand.
Julian > On Jan 2, 2018, at 2:00 PM, Michael Mior <[email protected]> wrote: > > Even if we do include mvnw, isn't it still possible to use a compatible mvn > directly? > > -- > Michael Mior > [email protected] > > 2018-01-02 15:35 GMT-05:00 Julian Hyde <[email protected]>: > >> True, but for 2 and 3 it’s not much of a hardship to type >> >> $ /usr/local/maven-x.y.z/bin/mvn -s my-settings.xml target >> >> rather than >> >> $ mvn target >> >> And for 1, I claim that typing “mvn” is less surprising to most people >> than typing “mvnw”. Because most people who build java code these days are >> familiar with mvn. >> >> Julian >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Jan 2, 2018, at 12:17 PM, Vladimir Sitnikov < >> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Multiple versions of Maven can be installed side-by-side (and we don't >>> have esoteric requirements). As such, I don't see the need for such a >>> change >>> >>> The reasons could include: >>> 1) Simplified Apache Maven installation for those who have no experience >>> with it >>> 2) Having multiple settings.xml files (e.g. if corporate rules requires >>> certain settings.xml that is incompatible with Apache Calcite >> settings.xml) >>> 3) Simplified management of multiple Apache Maven versions. In the same >>> way, corporate rules might require specific mvn version (outdated due to >>> plugins, etc), so that version would likely be the default. >>> >>> Vladimir >> >>
