Thanks Nate, cool, alright, so it sounds like the 3 of you are fine with make and if it's a simple make ; make all ; make install (probably with a sudo in there somewhere ;) ) then even I could get it right (which is saying something!) :)
Would be nice to know what Simon thinks since he's a Lucy committer now too... Cheers, Chris On Nov 17, 2010, at 11:08 AM, Nathan Kurz wrote: > On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 12:31 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hmm, my 2 cents is that it's infinitely simpler to understand a build.xml >> file (or better yet a Maven pom.xml :) -- just my opinion people no >> tomatoes!) than it is to understand makefiles, or better yet, programs that >> generate makefiles on the fly, or that generate other build scripts on the >> fly etc etc. > > I much prefer Make to all alternatives. Lucy is at base a C project, > and Make is the standard for C. Certainly other things can work, but > most anything else causes me about the same amount of alarm as a > project that has only a README.doc in Word format. > >> Ant is available on nearly every Linux distribution that I've come across in >> recent years (installed into /usr/bin/ant or some variant). > > I don't recall the details, but I recently tried to install Ant on my > current desktop (Linux Slamd64) and gave up. I'll do it from source > at some point, but think it's silly that I'm not able to make updates > to the Lucy project page until then. My initial impressions of Ant > are hence quite negative. > >> That said, these are just my preferences (as are Marvin's for Make/programs >> that generate makes and so forth :) ). What do others think? The key >> question to ask yourselves is: >> >> 1. will Marvin be the *only* RM that this project ever sees? > > Had to look up RM. No, presumably there will be other Release > Managers so that Marvin can spend his time on areas more demanding of > his particular expertise. > >> 2. will Marvin be the *only* person building this project, ever? > > No, I presume that some significant percentage of users will be > building this. The bar should be pretty low, roughly equivalent to > 'make config; make all; make install'. > >> 3. of the 2-3 existing Lucy developers, what are the preferences? I know >> Marvin's: what about Peter/Nate? > > Make without reliance on autoconf or other impenetrable junk. The > general approach Marvin is currently using seems fine, although > removing reliance on Perl seems good. I want something short that > can be clearly understood in it's entirety. > > --nate > > ps. My feelings on Make are reasonably echoed here: > http://blog.jgc.org/2010/11/things-make-got-right-and-how-to-make.html ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: [email protected] WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
