On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 13:42:47 +0200, Left Right <olegsivo...@gmail.com> wrote: Non-text part: multipart/alternative > > For compiling complex, multi-dependent Java projects, in a reproducable > > fashion, there really only one option, Maven. > > HP Software fired this summer a whole 10 developers team in San Diego for, > you guess what? - consequently failing to build a Maven project of about > 300 files in total (less then 10 poms all in all) in about 4 month time! I > saw that happen, I remember people in our office having many hours of > conversation all being dedicated to the fact that the project doesn't > compile in the same way it does on our end. > What you say is a very naive belief: Maven is not a good tool for complex > projects. In fact, looking back and imagining the time that was spent in a > fruitless attempts to get the thing to work, I could've singlehandedly > written all build scripts at least 10 times test them on different > platforms and document them. It's a horrible misconception, and I've no > idea where it comes from. > > Best. > > wvxvw
Sorry 'Left Right', an anecdotal story does not a truth make. If your story is/was true, I don't think the problem was between the Software and the Build System, I think it was a Problem Between The Chair And Keyboard. There seems to be a bit of an anti-maven, pressure group - manifesting itself in the lowlands at the moment. Best. 'Bryan Hunt'
