ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jon Stevens <>
Subject Re: cvs commit: jakarta-ant/lib - New directory
Date Mon, 27 Nov 2000 22:54:15 GMT
on 11/27/2000 11:44 AM, "Peter Donald" <> wrote:

> Compare the projects Turbine, Cocoon and BSF. When I first looked at
> Turbine it was hell to setup. The second time I had a look it was much
> easier (Only DB setup was painful). Last time I looked it was a breeze to
> setup and strangely enough the community has grown considerably.
> Cocoon1 had a relatively low cost of entry and had a large community. With
> Cocoon2 the cost increased significantly and has continued to increase.
> Thus the developer community around it has declined a bit recently.
> BSF has a higher cost of entry and has good code - thus has only attracted
> a small community so far.
> Adding in required libs reduces cost of entry for developers of Ant which
> means more ideas/code hackery/time is likely to be contributed. This is the
> main aim of this.

I can't agree more.

As one of the main instigators for Turbine, I can't even begin to express
how much adding the .jar's to CVS has helped the overall project.

So, until we have a system that makes it easy for people to grab .jar's from
a website using Ant, I say put the .jar's in CVS and anyone who objects
should only respond with code that implements a JPAN.

I'm tired of arguing about this issue. For now the summary is that .jar's in
CVS are a good thing. Once someone decides to implement JPAN, I will remove
the .jar's.



twice of not very much is still a lot more than not very much

View raw message