buildr-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Klaas Prause <>
Subject AW: dzone
Date Mon, 25 Jan 2010 12:26:46 GMT
If you have an questions about it, just drop me a note. It works like a charm for us but I
guess it needs some tweaking for the public. We have covered all of our bases so far.


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Alex Boisvert [] 
Gesendet: Sonntag, 24. Januar 2010 20:17
Betreff: Re: dzone

Yes, that's what I had in mind.  I need to take a second serious look at it.


On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Peter Schröder <> wrote:

> did you have a look at ivy4r (
> ?
> we are using it for all of our projects.
> i think that it would be great to integrate something like that directly
> into buildr.
> ________________________________________
> Von: Alex Boisvert []
> Gesendet: Samstag, 23. Januar 2010 18:25
> An:
> Betreff: Re: dzone
> Nice article.   The comments/reactions to buildr are always interesting.
> If I can segway for a moment... The JVM build tool landscape has certainly
> expanded much since buildr started.  There are more potent choices
> available
> (e.g. Graddle and SBT).  Maven2 has fixed a lot of issues from its early
> days.  And now Maven3 on the way... I think it gets more difficult to get
> our message across because some of the alternatives may look similar on the
> surface and may share some/many of the features.
> For better or worse, a distinguishing feature of Buildr remains its ties to
> Ruby.  Ruby is a great language with a rich ecosystem and a lively
> culture.   It can also be perceived as 'another language to learn' or
> 'introducing yet-another language' into a project.  I'd rank these fears as
> our biggest obstacle to popularity.  However, these fears are irrational
> and
> as a small project I don't think there's much we can do to overcome them.
> Beyond the language issue, I think our two most important challenges today
> are 1) ease of installation and 2) a good story on dependency management.
> We've gotten much better on the installation side recently and I hope the
> all-in-one distro will help starting with Buildr 1.4.0.
> On the dependency management side, I consider what we have today very
> solid.  Whitelisting dependencies has worked very well for many of us on
> big
> projects and is probably an under-appreciated feature.  It's hard to
> communicate the value here without people having had bad experiences with
> other transitive dependency management approach.  The seduction of
> transitive dependencies is too great -- on paper it always works
> perfectly.   So if there's one thing I'd like to improve after Buildr 1.4.0
> it's our story on dependency management.   We need to communicate better
> but
> also add better tooling support.  I think better/tigher integration with
> Ivy
> would go a long way.   There's probably other good approaches out there and
> I'd be interested in hearing about what other people  think.
> My $0.02 on the buildr state of the union.  Thanks for the article!  Every
> bit of advocacy helps.  Now if I could find some time to blog...
> alex
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 12:37 AM, Peter Schröder <> wrote:
> > hi,
> >
> > i posted a little article about buildr on dzone (
> >
> >
> > i hope that it will create some attention for buildr to let the community
> > grow further.
> >
> > kind regards,
> > peter

View raw message