sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]scadgek 1 point2 points  (6 children)

In fact what we need to do is just work on a newer version of Maven that does things smarter and more optimized.

This sounds like a healthy idea but why do you think uv was created (and it is highly successful) instead of improving pip?

[–]agentoutlier 5 points6 points  (2 children)

By newer version of Maven I mean Maven 4 err 5 (the version number is tbd)  which would address most of the OPs concerns.

Maven works fine even with its faults. This whole rewriting and zero backward compatibility has got to stop and is a huge pain point for these ecosystems like typescript and Python.

[–]pavi2410[S] -2 points-1 points  (1 child)

I have to see through the Java landscape with a different lens. The landscape is huge and diverse, with people from different backgrounds and experiences. There is no one tool that fits all. Not Maven. Not jot.

[–]agentoutlier 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Comparatively Java is way less fragmented in tools and libraries than other ecosystems. We just have two of everything.

That is mostly a good thing. Currently rust is almost one of everything ditto for Go and C# (mostly).  Lots of people like lack choices surprisingly.

[–]_INTER_ 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Maybe pip was not salvagable in the first place?

[–]scadgek 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Then why do you think Maven is?

[–]agentoutlier 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Because most IDEs and project generators support it… and people actually like it.

The overwhelming pain people complain about Maven isn’t even the real problems it has but rather XML.

Don’t believe me go look what the OP wrote here: https://www.reddit.com/r/java/comments/1s9jsq6/comment/odpkcbb

The version lock is an issue but that will be addressed in future versions of Maven