No commits on GitHub since 2022, the slack channel is dead silent, and it seems everyone here recommends deps.edn. Is Leiningen worth using in 2023 or should I jump ship?

  • weavejester@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Build lacks support for adding project descriptions, URLs and licenses to pom files

    No, it specifically supports this now.

    That’s good to hear. It looks like that functionality was only added in 2 weeks ago, though.

    it expects that you maintain a pom file in source control

    Nope. That’s never been true. It’s always been optional.

    It’s possible I misinterpreted Alex Miller’s response, but when I asked previously about how to support extra pom data (before :pom-data), that was the answer I was given: “We don’t support lots of elements as we can sync from a source pom[. ]So write the pom template with whatever you need and sync that”

    Pretty much everyone has given up on signing at this point, I think? Clojars certainly doesn’t care any more. In other words, this feels like a straw man / moot argument.

    I still sign all my packages. I mean, why not? I already have it all set up. It may be that I’m in the minority, but removing signatures would feel like a step backward.

    I’m not sure why you consider this a “straw man / moot argument”. Note that I’m not advocating people use Leiningen, I’m just stating the reasons I still use Leiningen.

    • alexdmiller@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      You interpreted my response correctly at the time … my mind was changed. :)

      Nobody anywhere checks the signature (and if you try using the tools provided, you’ll find out why), so signatures are largely security theater in maven world. This is bad, and we should do better. Hoping to eventually have time to work more on this, and have had some sidebars with Phil H about it.