buildr-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Grotzke <martin.grot...@javakaffee.de>
Subject Re: Why use buildr?
Date Wed, 18 Feb 2009 09:28:22 GMT
Ok, great!

Cheers,
Martin


On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 08:48 -0600, Daniel Spiewak wrote:
> No, quite the opposite.  Buildr has fantastic auto-magical support for  
> the major test frameworks.  This is especially evident where Scala is  
> concerned.  Specs and ScalaCheck (my tools of choice) "just work".
> 
> Daniel
> 
> On Feb 17, 2009, at 2:39 AM, Martin Grotzke <martin.grotzke@javakaffee.de 
>  > wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 2009-02-16 at 18:32 -0600, Daniel Spiewak wrote:
> >> I would strongly emphasize the "scripting language not XML" point,  
> >> since
> >> this is (I think) Buildr's killer feature.  Having written a lot of  
> >> scripty
> >> Ant in my day, it is incomparably easier to do the same thing in  
> >> Buildr.
> >>
> >> Another point that might be worth mentioning is Buildr's Scala  
> >> support,
> >> which is second to none in my opinion.  Maven does support Scala  
> >> with a
> >> plugin (as does Ant), but support for test frameworks and the like is
> >> lacking IIRC.
> > Are you saying that the support of buildr for test frameworks is
> > lacking?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Martin
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Daniel
> >>
> >> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 5:19 PM, Martin Grotzke <
> >> martin.grotzke@javakaffee.de> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> in our next project I'd like to use buildr for build management.
> >>> Now I only have to convince my colleagues, why we should use  
> >>> buildr and
> >>> not maven or ant+ivy.
> >>>
> >>> I'd say it has the best of both worlds:
> >>> - standard build process (like maven)
> >>> - conventions for project/directory structure (like maven)
> >>> - dependency mgmt using maven repos
> >>> - and though it provides the flexibility as ant does
> >>> - all ant tasks can be used in buildr
> >>>
> >>> It has some advanteges over maven and ant:
> >>> - buildr is even easier and more flexible as ant since you don't  
> >>> have to
> >>> work with xml to do e.g. an if/then/else - just use ruby (no need to
> >>> create tasks/mojos)
> >>> - build profiles supporting inheritence (and usage of profile
> >>> variables/properties)
> >>> - much more compact than maven and ant
> >>> - great multi-module / multi-project support: if you have project  
> >>> A and
> >>> B, where B depends on A, then you can just build B, which
> >>> automatically triggers a build of A if necessary
> >>> - fast (I only compared it to maven)
> >>>
> >>> To be fair to my colleagues I'd also like to mention the drawback  
> >>> I see:
> >>> - relatively new, so there might be some issues we run into
> >>> - not so many examples / documentation available (as it's new),
> >>> however, this is compensated by this great mailing list :)
> >>> - not so many built-in reporting-plugins available as they are  
> >>> available
> >>> for maven
> >>>
> >>> Would you add/remove/change some item of this list?
> >>>
> >>> Thx && cheers,
> >>> Martin
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> 

Mime
View raw message