[Xmlunit-general] [RESEND] Re: xmlunit.org

[Stefan B. <ste...@fr...>]

[looks as if there has been some kind of hickup yesterday]

From: Stefan Bodewig <bo...@ap...>
To: xml...@li...
Subject: Re: [Xmlunit-general] xmlunit.org
References: <87b...@v3...>
	<trinity-71edbf3b-e880-4568-a6d7-c90c9d574357-1419445946480@3capp-gmx-bs51>
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 12:12:05 +0100
In-Reply-To: <trinity-71edbf3b-e880-4568-a6d7-c90c9d574357-1419445946480@3capp-gmx-bs51>
	(Harald Brabenetz's message of "Wed, 24 Dec 2014 19:32:26 +0100")
Message-ID: <87o...@v3...>

On 2014-12-24, Harald Brabenetz wrote:

> I would like to provide the changes to a standard maven Project.

Somehow I knew this would happen, I just didn't expect it to be the
first thing that comes up :-)

I could counter all of your arguments with a "it's not a problem for
me".  For example xmlunit 1.x is in maven central, so I obviously know
how to get it there without using the release plugin ;-)

But I'm willing to accept that my view of the world is not shared by too
many people.  So I may switch to using Maven and a multi-module layout
even though it would hurt me, but I'd *really* like to understand what
the benefit for XMLUnit would be.

To explain what I mean: when I started writing the user guide for
XMLUnit for Java 1.x I've been talked into using docbook rather than
LaTeX against my personal preferences (at least that's my
recollection).  In the end I never received a single contribution to the
user guide and ended up using a system I didn't want to use.  I'd prefer
to not see the same happen again.

I guess what I'm asking is: can I be sure there will be a result that
goes beyond replacing a build system I like with one I don't like :-)

Is there anything in particular you'd want to work on?

> There is "maybe" only one Problem:
> 	I have no clue how the .Net part works.

Which shows a totally different but real problem.  I cannot expect
people to be equally familiar with or even just interested in the Java
and .NET implementations.  It may be better to finally split the two
implementations so contributors don't feel they have to contribute to
both parts at the same time.

Oh, the .NET part builds using NAnt, at least until anybody suggests to
move to MSBuild/xbuild.

Cheers

        Stefan