From: "R. Mark Volkmann" Date: 2005-01-26T05:19:58+09:00 Subject: Re: JRuby Gem? Quoting Chad Fowler : > On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 23:23:08 +0900, R. Mark Volkmann wrote: > > Quoting Chad Fowler : > > > > > On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:09:44 +0900, Nicholas Van Weerdenburg > > > wrote: > > > > > > does anyone know of anything similar to RubyGems for > > > > Java? I tried to get an updated Xalan the other day, and I almost > > > > fainted at the bizarre number of steps that the Jakarta site was > > > > making me do. > > > > > > Maven sort of does the same thing, though it's not focused on > > > installing libraries and applications. > > > http://maven.apache.org/ > > > > I'm not sure what you mean by saying "it's not focused on installing > libraries". > > That's the main reason I like it. Your build file specifies the libraries > > your application depends on and which versions. When you build your > project, > > if those libraries don't exist in your local repository, Maven downloads > them. > > They are just JAR files. No "install" is necessary, just the download. > > > > I mean that Maven's scope starts with and expands to way beyond just > installing libraries and applications. So, it's not really > appropriate to say that it is a RubyGems equivalent. It does, > however, provide a lot of the same functionality as RubyGems. I see your point and agree on this. > One thing I don't think maven lets you do is start without a build > file and just download and install libs. For example, if you have > maven installed, can you just simply do the equivalent of: maven > install someapplication? ...or maven install somelib? No, you can't. > That may actually be irrelevant in the case of Maven, which is kind of my > point. Right. I guess you could think of Maven as a combination of Rake and RubyGems. Unlike Ant, with Maven many commonly used targets are provided which means that your build file is mainly a list of library dependencies. -- R. Mark Volkmann Partner, Object Computing, Inc.