Hi,

On Oct 20, 2009, at 1:38 PM, Daniel Spiewak wrote:

I'm more in favor of a "One-Click-Buildr", unzip-and-go installation based
on JRuby.  Platform-specific builds are nice, but the idea is to bring
Buildr installation more in line with what Java developers would expect.
MacPorts really isn't any better or worse than RubyGems, so platform
specific builds don't gain us much.

I don't think these things are mutually exclusive. E.g., I use MacPorts to install ant and maven.

Rhett


Daniel

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Assaf Arkin <[email protected]> wrote:

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 5:46 AM, Ittay Dror <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi,


Regarding the next buildr version, I think the biggest issue should be
being able to quickly start using buildr.


My experience is that BuildR is great for me as a build developer. It allows me to do in several lines of code things that would take a lot
more in Ant and that I probably wouldn't even try with Maven.


However, when it comes to other developers that just want to compile the
code, the procedure to start working with BuildR is just an obstacle
they need to go through. And given that it is not as standard as Maven
or Ant, it is something new to install.


Right now, I have 3 people trying to use BuildR without success. The
first uses linux and so installed the ruby package but had segmentation faults with java 1.6 (which we must use), so he needed to compile ruby from source (not a smooth experience for a java developer coming from windows). After compiling and installing, trying to upload, he got an error about not being able to require openssl. Now, 'require' is not a known term to a java developer... the reason for the error was that at
the time of compilation he didn't have libssl-dev installed. So he
needed to install it, re-generate the Makefile for ext/openssl and then
install it. This was a long, un-Java process to go through...


Two other users had issues because they couldn't get BuildR to install on Mac. RJB could not find the ruby headers. We couldn't resolve this
issue, so they needed to resort to using another machine (!)


Of course there's the choice of using JRuby. However, It will still
require multiple steps (installing jruby then buildr) and I'm sure it
will have its own issues.


What it boils down to is bad first impression with BuildR.

I want to suggest that BuildR will be provided as a self-contained
package. It could be jruby with all gems that can be extracted some
placed and used, but optimally, it will also be packages per OS (can be
.tar.gz of binaries), which will help performance when running the
builds. An additional feature is proper inspection of the environment before running (something like 'require 'openssl' rescue puts "please
make sure you have openssl installed, on linux install libssl and on
mac...").


+1 and also consider platform-specific installation (apt-get, yum,
macports).

Assaf



Regards,
Ittay

P.s., I can try to accomplish this if the idea sounds good.











Reply via email to