Earlier quoted context omitted.
We at Communitivity see build ecosystems as being in one of four phases of evolution: * Instructive - Actual low level commands are basically entered in the build file, with some flow control logic. An example is Make. Ant is another, though Ant straddles the line between Instructive and Imperative. In military terms, you dictate individual unit actions. * Imperative - Build commands are entered into the build file,…
Is this from a poorly trained bot?
Java EE Is Moving to the Eclipse Foundation
141–144 of 144 posts
Re: Java EE Is Moving to the Eclipse Foundation
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this from a poorly trained bot?
Ouch. Well, live and learn. It would be nice though if one or two of those who down-voted me explained why my comment was objectionable, so at least I can avoid a repeat of whatever mistake I made.
Further, the comment is written in a pretty grating marketing-style: "We at Communitivity see build ecosystems..." and ends by plugging a product. Also, military analogies are pretty weird when addressing an audience of people who on average have substantially more experience with build systems than with military command structure.
I looked at your comment history, and this is not how you write. (Also, more of a curious aside, you've had a profile with that name for 6.5 years, and this comment seems to be the first record of you being a plural "we" launching a product?). You clearly understand the style of this community and how to contribute, and should not need explaining why copy-pasting an only barely not-off-topic marketing blurb would be unpopular.
Re: Java EE Is Moving to the Eclipse Foundation
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just replacing XML with JSON doesn't make anything modern.
Someone is finally saying this. Plus, there is a ton of things that json can't do or isn't supposed to do (things like defining a grammar, xpath, xquery, xslt and a lot more)
Re: Java EE Is Moving to the Eclipse Foundation
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ouch. Well, live and learn. It would be nice though if one or two of those who down-voted me explained why my comment was objectionable, so at least I can avoid a repeat of whatever mistake I made.
The comment only very tangentially touches on the subject matter of the GP. Crucially, it seems to suggest that Maven is at a higher "phase of evolution" than Gradle (which is anachronistic) which is the opposite of both the GP and my original claim. A valuable contribution might be to explain why Gradle belongs at a lower level of evolution from Maven. Further, the comment is written in a pretty grating marketing-st…
Which is ironic, because a good chunk of my success as a contractor is improving DoD projects I work on by applying the stuff I've learned from the startup community through HN, blogs, and friends doing startups.
You are also right regarding evolution, it's not the right word and I should have taken the time to come up with the right word - since it can't be evolution as Gradle came after Maven. Also, I was responding to a comment thread that had already started to drift from the GP to be on Maven vs. Gradle, and shouldn't have drifted it further.
To answer your question on the profile.. I had an aborted attempt to do a startup when the company I was with changed their IPR terms at the same time my parents died, and I wound up putting that dream on the shelf until I left that company. For various reasons (family medical costs among them) I wasn't able to go all-in 100% on my startup.
I appreciate the help, and will make sure I change hats before commenting in the future. To end on a smile, I'll show why this will be harder than you might think. Writing the first sentence I had a brief moment where I was about to type "Your help is greatly appreciated. I'll ensure my comments are of higher quality in the future, and carefully consider the content of future postings". Then I realized I was doing it again.