On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 1:47 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > On 2/28/12 11:37 AM, "Greg Reddin" <gred...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> That's basically another abstract idea because there is no Maven or >> Gradle build. On the surface I can't really support it because it >> elevates ant to a level of a "master build" and anyone doing something >> else has to figure out how to make it work. If I ever get some time I >> intend to look into what it would take to get the framework to build >> with Maven. Thus far I haven't been able to do it. But when (if) I do >> or someone else does, we can compare the Maven (or Gradle) build with >> the current build and decide if we want to pick one going forward. We >> may decide there's a new model that's far superior to what we have >> now. >> >> Greg > I'm not sure I understand why that's abstract. That is the reality right > now. I'm certainly open to change going forward, but I would think it would > be a barrier to progress for the commit process to require that you wait for > more than one build script to complete, and know how to fix multiple build > systems if they break.
Ok, I don't think we disagree :-) I'd say the reality right now is that we have one build system - ant. I too don't think we should support multiple build systems for the framework. I think the framework should have one build system and publish artifacts so that they can be consumed by whatever build systems we wish to support. Greg
