Talk:Apache Maven

What is Maven

First sentence: "Maven is a software tool for project management and build automation." Changed to: Maven is a build automation and software comprehension tool. Motivation: The first sentence must be clear and capture the essence. Maven is foremost a build tool, secondly a software comprehension tool and thirdly a project management tool.

It is inherently a build tool because the (default) lifecycle is a build lifecycle. It is a software comprehension tool because it declares a piece of software in terms of artifact, dependencies, packaging, build process, programming language, ci etc for quick comprehension. It is questionably a project management tool. It can be argued that a tool that manages software is a software management tool rather than a project management tool, that a project management tool also should manage people and timeline, that project managers are not the users of Maven, that the first element of the POM more precisely should have been <software> and not <project> and that the word project has a very diffuse/unconventional meaning in Maven.

Maven describes itself as both software comprehension and project management, but not as a build tool, which is probably the origin to this confusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.180.234.250 (talk) 21:02, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Why do you think Maven would be a tool for build automation? IMO A build automation tool does builds automatically, say a CI tool like Jenkins. Maven doesn't do that. A build definition tool, a build execution tool, but certainly not a build automation tool. Slsh (talk) 10:07, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

From the introduction of this article, I still don't understand what Maven is/does. I get the impression that i would have to be a programmer or computer engineer to understand just the introduction. Can someone fix it so us plebes can understand it easier? I thought the point of Wikipedia articles was to make knowledge accessible, this intro is not accessible at all. Vhrico (talk) 02:50, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

One doesn't need to be (much of) a programmer to understand what Maven does, but it certainly does help to be one in order to understand why it is needed. The key factor to be explained is not what Maven is or does, but how it's different from tools like Ant or Puppet which do similiar, but distinct, things.

Who is the audience for this article? I'll take a look and see what can be done, but "the man on the Clapham omnibus" just doesn't have much interest in Maven, so it's really not necessary to explain it down to that level. Andy Dingley (talk) 07:49, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Actually the point of Wikipedia is "to explain it to that level". I'm not advocating to "make it stupid/simple", but at least the introduction of the article should be for someone that may not be a programmer but might be interested in programming to at least be able to gain a starting understanding of what Maven is. The article should be what maven is and does in addition to differentiation between Maven and other applications.Vhrico (talk) 03:41, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

repository links

I remove the links to the Maven repositories; they contain no useful information about Maven. The official Maven sites (v.1 and v.2) link to the Maven repositories. --Philippe 12:46, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

key criticisms

Criticisms are written in an unencyclopedic tone: "pathetic documentation", "bordering on completely useless?". It also seems POV. 201.216.245.25 13:36, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I concur. It may be written by a dissatisfied user, but it could be rephrased better. Something such as "There are many plug ins to do advanced stages in building and testing java applications, but the source appears to get more care than the documentation. This is a common problem with [Open Source] projects, which need to get good documenters on the team.

It has pretty ambigious error messages too, but I wont go there.

There is also no coverage of its strengths: good "out the box" experience, especially with a simple Java application that follows the maven directory structure and is designed to create and test a single JAR file. SteveLoughran 17:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Documentation is excellent in my personal opinion: http://maven.apache.org/guides/ The discussion about maven shouldn't happen in the article but here.Iweinf 10:36, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

This whole article is written oddly, evidenced sentences such as these two: "Maven believes in project life cycle. The parts of main maven life cycle are:" Why is Maven intermittently in lower case? This is the first time I'm reading about Maven, but it seems like the Apache project website shows it capitalized in all cases. Also, 'believes'? Is the software project team doing the believing or the software itself? Marcthepirate 20:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Removing key criticisms

I removed the entire "key criticisms" section. Above all considerations, that section was completely unsourced. Unsourced content must be removed when challenged, and I hereby so challenge. Secondarily, I think the documentation issue was a legitimate criticism, though not "key". In my mind a useful dialogue would be the common complaint that Maven requires adherence to a certain project layout, followed by a discussion as to why that path was chosen and the benefits it purports to bring. But above all, Wikipedia entries must have reputable external primary sources, and this section did not have any. 139.76.128.71 18:25, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

http://www.oreillynet.com/onjava/blog/2006/03/maven_project_info_reports_con.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.217.22.128 (talk) 01:45, August 23, 2007 (UTC)

I have added the explanation/criticism of Maven's rigid "convention over configuration" doctrine. This is one of the major aspects of Maven, which some consider its greatest weakness and others its greatest strength, and the article is not complete without some treatment of it. Have linked back to the "what is maven" page which states, among other things, "If you decide to use Maven, and have an unusual build structure that you cannot reorganise, you may have to forgo some features or the use of Maven altogether." Lucky Bottlecap (talk) 15:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Seems reasonable. Also there is an implicit assumption about lifecycle that is unchangeable. What if you test after deployment, go through staging operations, etc? I suppose that is dealt with by creating meta-projects. The other area of concern to me is POM quality in the m2 repository; POM files grandfathered in from the maven 1 repository are mediocre, and newer artifacts often have too many dependencies. SteveLoughran (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 15:30, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

If you test after deployment, that's integration testing that is done on the integration test phase. Default test phase is for unit tests. I don't see a problem with Maven approach on this. Slsh (talk) 10:09, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

POV

What on earth is that rant about documentation?

Reverted

Reverted back to the last "good" version of the wikipedia. The additions are basically a cut-paste of already discussed/removed content in an attempt to lash out at the Maven community; probably driven by emotional frustration. Clearly improper comments such as claims that the community is "on acid" should have no place on Wikipedia.

The author of the comments appears to have some issues with Maven; the same IP address was the original author of the criticisms section. However, with the removal of all criticisms, the article is now a fairly bland bit of man page of a tool, not an independent analysis of the product and its role in a modern project. Someone needs to step up to do this. I'm probably biased (or at least can be perceived as such), so am not volunteering SteveLoughran 14:29, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree. The introduction is clear, and the Theory section could stay if it was reworked. Right now, it looks like every sentence was written by a different person, not to mention the bunch of external links that aren't really appealing (and should be references rather than actual content).

Other parts belong to the documentation, not to an encyclopedia. 139.165.16.172 (talk) 15:03, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Misleading Introduction

The introduction is very misleading. The second sentence: It is similar in functionality to the Apache Ant tool (and to a lesser extent, PHP's PEAR and Perl's CPAN), but has a simpler build configuration model, based on an XML format.

This leads the reader to believe that Maven is a combination procedural / declarative build tool (Like Ant or Make) combined with a global package management repository like CPAN or PEAR. The first assertion is almost correct, as Maven does in fact bundle and include Ant (among many other tools). The second is wildly off the mark - things like CPAN and PEAR serve as a single point of distribution for the collected body of user created code for their respective programming languages, whereas Maven's notion of repositories serve as a means of managing all the artifacts (both project specific and third party) required to build a particular project. There are global Maven repositories being run by various parties, but all of those draw their artifacts from the sites their respective project teams released them on.

I realize it's not kosher to copy from other sites, but the first sentence of the Maven web site conveys the truth most succinctly: Maven is a software project management and comprehension tool. Based on the concept of a project object model (POM), Maven can manage a project's build, reporting and documentation from a central piece of information.

--chrisfeohpatti —Preceding comment was added at 18:45, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Question about Intro

isn't the phrase "has a simpler build configuration model" also POV? who says it's simpler -- do the people who use/love ant agree? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.222.108.142 (talk) 02:43, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

IDE support

I added references for Netbeans & IntelliJ IDEA support. Some work may still need to be done on this section; at some point, it may even be removed completely: since the 'big 3' (nebeans/intellij/eclipse) & by extension their derivatives all support Maven (others may as well), this really isn't notable. The only distinction will be the differing levels of maven-related features, which would be more appropriately listed on their respective IDE page.

I also rephrased the sentence "there are maven plugins for creating IDE configuration files from the POM", since that is an antiquated (and incomplete) solution for binding the IDE to the POM, originally implemented just to get maven working with the IDE. Today, IDE's have Maven support more or less 'natively' (e.g., it comes by default w/ netbeans -- no longer needs to be manually added: just "file -> open" on a maven project, with no intermediate "project" files). Note: it also may not be evident to casual readers that distinguishing a feature as a "plugin" or "supported natively" is largely irrelevant (e.g,. just about everything is a plugin in Eclipse), and really doesn't imply better or worse tool integration. Michael (talk|contrib) —Preceding undated comment added 01:32, 2 September 2009 (UTC).

Disambiguation

Could someone with better wiki-fu than mine please put a disambiguation link to the word "maven" at the top of the article? My feeble attempts yield a link to a nonexistent "Apache Maven (Disambiguation)" page. The correct page is at http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Maven_(disambiguation) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.173.46.50 (talk) 18:35, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Seems strange that a person would end up here, but be looking for some other use of Maven, are you sure including the disambiguation link would be helpful? Monty₈₄₅ 18:45, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Apache Maven. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150507014621/http://maven.apache.org:80/eclipse-plugin.html to https://maven.apache.org/eclipse-plugin.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:57, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Apache Maven. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130421060027/http://www.sonatype.com/books/mvnref-book/reference/installation-sect-compare-ant-maven.html to http://www.sonatype.com/books/mvnref-book/reference/installation-sect-compare-ant-maven.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:52, 7 July 2017 (UTC)