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 09:44:04 GMT
D'oh, my memory's that bad, that I even forgot that I already answered -
or I just need to get another cup of coffee!! :)

Sorry for spamming,
Martin


On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 10:28 +0100, Martin Grotzke wrote:
> 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