This was a comparison Steve and I did in our book, be sure to see the attached PDF file there.
Update: we are now using Anthill *and* CruiseControl just because we can and its interesting to compare them. I wholeheartedly recommend Anthill. Since writing about Anthill, I have met and become good friends with Maciej Zawadzki, the creator of Anthill (so there is full disclosure, in case bias is perceived :).
The e-mails we get from CruiseControl are prettier, since we are using the HTML e-mailer and are able to see our build, unit test, and repository results all in a nice view without having to scroll through the actual build file.
But, the counterpoint is that we push our <junitreport> results to the Anthill output directory automatically and can view them through our intranet with a browser, and this is something that seems to be rather difficult (e.g. we haven't configured it yet because it wasn't worth the time/trouble) with CruiseControl. Also note, we are not running the latest versions of either of these tools - what we have running works well enough and so we have not had a need to tinker with those tools.
So, the short story: use Anthill. If that doesn't meet your needs, then first get in touch with the Anthill e-mail list to see if your issues are already resolved or it is an easy fix. Maciej is very active with and the open-source version of Anthill is still very much alive and well, with Maciej's full commitment to it already being explicitly stated on their e-mail list recently.
Erik
p.s. I also have found it disheartening that CruiseControl was so difficult to configure initially, and that it had such hard-coded settings in their WEB-INF/web.xml that had to be changed, rather than Anthill's elegant easy configuration from a web browser. I suspect these issues have been addressed at least partially by the CC team, but it was an afterthought rather than being done from the start.
On Thursday, January 9, 2003, at 09:03 PM, Nau, Michael wrote:
I have been assigned with setting up an integrated build process for all
of our software components. The idea being to build each component
working with the dependency tree in a top-to-bottom fashion. We
currently have approximately 25 components which are currently being
build individually with ant.
Does anyone have any recommendations for this. My initial thought was to
have a master build.xml file that calls into the component's build.xml.
But after doing to investigation I came across a couple of tools that
seem to be designed for this problem: AntHill, CruiseControl & Gump.
Does anyone have any recommendations as to which one is better?
Thanks,
Mike.
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
