On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 7:29 PM, Brandon Van Every <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > http://www.onjava.com/pub/a/onjava/2007/12/05/introducing-raven-an-elegant-build-for-java.html
The comments following this article are interesting. For instance, on syntax: "This is just stupid. The Ruby syntax is horrendous. I'd rather use Groovy than Ruby if I was ever going to use a scripting language. I've never been stuck using Ant either, it does everything I need." "I've just having a look to Raven and Buildr, Raven seems to be a little bit hard to read for a Raven /Ruby noob (too many think like << [{' not very undestable when who want to quicly know : "what this project produced, on what it depends on ...)." Sound familiar? Earlier I mused that moving CMake to Ruby would be more strategic than Lua, if it were only about language sales. Probably premature! I do recall that Python vs. Ruby is a big split as far as language taste and philosophy. "What do I have to install to run Ant or Maven vs what do I have to install to use Raven?" - Same old same old about people being too lazy to download stuff. Maven tries to manage the build strategy and lifecycle for you. This leads to the problem of the tool trying to be too clever: "About Maven major drawback, you have often to rethink your process (deploy,deliver)... because these are not suited to Maven Plugins. You can create our own but you have to maintain it and I think, this is bug-prone as Ant..." Cheers, Brandon Van Every _______________________________________________ CMake mailing list CMake@cmake.org http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake