buildr-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Assaf Arkin <ar...@intalio.com>
Subject Re: Internal error: Called Buildr.settings before buildfile located - again
Date Wed, 11 Feb 2009 16:22:02 GMT
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 8:03 AM, Daniel Spiewak <djspiewak@gmail.com> wrote:

> Another item of interest is the fact that Maven plugins are dead easy to
> use.  Just stick the plugin dependency in the POM, and that plugin will be
> emerged and available for use.  It would be nice if Buildr had a central
> extensions repo of the same ilk.  Right now, Buildr extensions (other than
> the "official" ones) are pretty-much ad hoc .rake files that are passed
> from
> person-to-person.


How about Ruby Gems?
http://buildr.apache.org/more_stuff.html#using_gems

>From the lack of people complaining about it, I guess no body is using
it. Maybe we need to put more emphasis on it? Or figure out something
better?

Assaf


>
>
> Daniel
>
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Daniel Spiewak <djspiewak@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> >
> >    - Download sources (there is a JIRA issue for this)
> >    - Artifact specification by SCM (e.g. depend on trunk/ version of
> >    Wicket, which will cause Buildr/Maven to checkout the artifact and
> invoke
> >    its POM, installing into local repo of build was successful)
> >    - *any* bizarre Maven plugin
> >
> > I honestly don't believe that the last issue is worth worrying about.  As
> a
> > user, I would expect that functionality which was designed specifically
> for
> > Maven will indeed require maven to execute.  The Java.net artifact
> installer
> > is an example of this.  It's doable within Buildr, but it would have to
> be
> > done in a different way using a Buildr-specific extension (as opposed to
> the
> > current Maven-specific extension/plugin).
> >
> > Source downloading and SCM-dependencies are very doable and would serve
> to
> > nicely round-out Buildr as a drop-in Maven replacement.  Sources are
> > particularly relevant for IDEs (content assist).  I've seen fewer
> projects
> > with SCM dependencies, but they do indeed exist (e.g. the Teachscape
> > internal application often depends upon the trunk/ version of Wicket and
> > several of its sub-projects).
> >
> > Daniel
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Alexis Midon <alexismidon@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> could you be more specific and list these things Buildr does not satisfy
> >> out
> >> of the box? this could be a good source of inspiration for future
> >> improvements.
> >>
> >> Alexis
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Daniel Spiewak <djspiewak@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > In principle, I agree that the POM converter should just work.
> >>  There's
> >> > a
> >> > > > lot of stuff that Maven does that Buildr doesn't immediately
> >> satisfy,
> >> > > What do you mean, do you have an example for this?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > In general, anything which requires a Maven plugin is unsatisfiable in
> >> > Buildr out of the box.  That's not to say that you can't write a
> little
> >> bit
> >> > of Ruby to handle it for you, but it's not as immediate as in Maven
> >> > (obviously, because the plugin was designed for Maven and not Buildr).
> >>  For
> >> > example, things like java.net artifact installation.  Also, Maven
> does
> >> > things like downloading source (when available) and even checking out
> a
> >> > project from an SCM, building it and installing into your local repo.
> >> > Again, Buildr is *capable* of all these things, but that doesn't mean
> it
> >> > fully supports them out of the box.
> >> >
> >> > Daniel
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message