+1 for me too. I've personally struggled with the same issues in the past.
On 6/7/2013 10:51 AM, Noah White wrote:
> +1 for non-maven support
>
> On Jun 7, 2013, at 10:45 AM, <simon_at_dancingcloudphotography.com> wrote:
>
>> All this said, however, it would be more "normal" and I believe more
>> helpful if the primary download link actually linked directly to
>> downloads, with brief indications of their purpose. By all means offer
>> the pom elements, since maven is clearly very popular (and for good
>> reason), but please don't ignore the rest of us with this new release!
>> Descriptive/explanatory material is good, but it should not hide the
>> primary purpose of the page. It might be better if it were linked off
>> the side of a table, so that it can be found easily when needed, but
>> not hide the important details for those not interested. And, given the
>> interim nature of the maven repository, I think it would be a good idea
>> to add that information even if only temporarily, so that those who
>> automate their dependencies aren't just looking at a list of errors.
>>
>> Meanwhile, congratulations on the new release, I know how much work
>> goes into these things. And, particularly, congratulations on getting
>> the client api standardized. That was actually what triggered my
>> attempt to get this all going and upgrade from the older version.