[eropple]

> Don't get me wrong, the Java version of it is going to be better than any other Java web framework you ever encountered most likely (especially if everything else one tried was based in part on J2EE/JSP since Play has none of those and no XML bs config).

It doesn't sound like you're really familiar with other Java frameworks. While I'm not really a fan of it, Ninja (as just one example) has none of that, and also doesn't have the torture chamber that is Play's (non-standard, custom, even more undocumented) flavor of sbt--easily the worst not-Maven Maven tool I have had the displeasure of working with.

I want to like Play because I love a ton of what they do, but just having to deal with sbt and the non-standard, doesn't-play-nice build system that they enforce has driven me away from it.

[eeperson]

You can also run Play projects with vanilla SBT. That's what I usually do. Then you don't have to worry about the unusual stuff that Play does.

[eropple]

Honestly I'd like to run them with vanilla Maven. There's play2-maven-plugin that's trying to get there and that'd be a great thing, I wish them well.