Hi guys, great plans. Unfortunately I'm so busy lately that I'm not of big help. Anyways, I have a couple of thoughts ;)
First, indeed, installing Buildr is still too cumbersome. Maven and Gradle meanwhile provide wrappers that are basically little jar with multi-platform batch scripts that download Gradle/Maven into the project's directory and execute them there. I personally also like the Docker approach, also because it ensures repeatable builds (i.e. ensuring the very same JDK version when releasing a patch for a years old release). If this could become a first class citizen for a in-project bootstrapping process, that could be a nice thing. I'm a Windows user btw, so I'm happy to help with improvements in this direction. Another interesting topic is dependency handling. I always had interesting discussions defending Buildrs approach to not automatically resolve nested dependencies. I really like lock_jars approach, which allows to name dependencies but they are resolved on demand and the resolution is also under version control. I think this is a big differentiator compared to Maven or Gradle and makes builds more stable over time. Cheers, Tammo On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 3:06 AM, Antoine Toulme <anto...@toulme.name> wrote: > > > > On Oct 8, 2016, at 12:50, Peter Donald <pe...@realityforge.org> wrote: > > > >> On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Antoine Toulme <anto...@toulme.name> > wrote: > >> > >> I have a few big items in mind for this release: > >> -Work around Buildr itself, fix the web site, add more examples that can > >> also be used as integration tests. > >> -Take a hard look at the addons folder. Knock out what’s old and crusty, > >> and maybe move a few into the main code line (I started using custom_pom > >> and I like it a lot!) > >> -Communicate and analyze what’s going on. Buildr has been very quiet for > >> the longest time, but the gem downloads are nothing less than > impressive. > >> > > > > From my observations it seems that Buildr is mostly in use at big > > organisations with complex build processes that none the less want some > > sort of standard build process across their system. It could explain the > > high usage with not a lot of chat. I wonder if we can simplify the > getting > > started/installation process that we may start to get people interested > > from the OSS world? > +1 > > > > > >> -Our installation story needs an overhaul and we should look at Docker > >> onbuild, and if there are new ways to bundle Buildr into an executable. > >> > > > > All of these sound like good ideas. That last step could be of particular > > use for windows users who tend to have a little more difficulty getting > > started. A few plugins may have to be looked at (namely IDEA and eclipse > > project generation) so that they can generate projects appropriate for > the > > outer OS but other than that I think dockerizing it would be a very > > interesting idea. > Good point, I'm taking note travis should run on windows. > > > > There may also be other issues that arise but several people who use > > virtualbox to run buildr on windows report this as the only major > problem. > > > > > >> I also think that 1.5 was a big release, and I would be in favor of > >> reacting quickly and cutting a release if - when we see bug reports > coming > >> in. > >> > > > > Yep. > > > > We are doing our roll out this next week so hopefully we will identify > any > > issues soon. > That's awesome! > > > > > >> Ideally, I’d like 1.5.1 to be out by Christmas unless something comes > up. > >> > >> What do you think? > >> > > > > All sounds good. > > > > -- > > Cheers, > > > > Peter Donald > > -- Tammo van Lessen - http://www.taval.de
