My company (over 400 developers) introduced Gradle about 2 years ago and now is shifting towards Maven. Im a Java developer and I gad to learn Gradle when it was introduced in my project. Not straightforward at the beginning (no Groovy knowledge, no functional programming), but after spending some time, Gradle is a bless for me ( I had to write a customized plugin for IntelliJ).
Now someone at the top of the chain is forcing a decision to move to Maven. The primary reason is, I quote:
“EAR/WAR support has always been primitive in Gradle and there is no sign that this might improve in the future”
I can hardly believe this statement, but since Gradle is still a new thing for me can You give me some ammunition to counter such statement?
Also there is constant backlash about complex dependencies in our project. By average we have > 20 subprojects which are dependent on each other and lots of 3rd party libraries included as well.
As far as I understand Gradle is using maven model to resolve dependencies, so any mess we have with dependecies will not magically disappear if we switch to vanilla Maven, am I right?
I suspect that primary obstacle in our company is lack of knowledge about Gradle/Groovy/functional programming and no one wants to learn it, because following problems are raised too:
- need of simpler build
- more developers should understand build tool
- easier support for tools like Eclipse WTP, Fortify
Before You forward me to the basics, I have read this page:
Its very informative but Im afraid it wont be enough to convice my company officials to change their mind.
I really appreciate community help in defending Gradle. What sort of arguments I should use? How I should tell them that EAR support is in fact very well since its just a zip file with manifest