You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to zeta-dev@incubator.apache.org by Jerome Renard <je...@gmail.com> on 2011/04/11 19:39:33 UTC
[zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
Hello,
I started to create an Ant based version of the Makefile available in website/
The problem with the Makefile is that it does not work at all on Mac Os X and
is kind of hard to read.
I committed what I did in website/ so feel free to svn up and to run:
ant install-ant-dependencies
After that you can run ant -p in order to see the list of available targets.
The Ant biuld file does not work yet. I can not test the
"extract-phpdoc" target as
I think I miss the high level view on how the process should be launched.
What I would like to fix first is the extract-phpdoc target, for now
it does not work because
there is no component in content/documentation/trunk/ but where these
components are
supposed to come from ? Don't you think the "tutorials" target should
be a dependency of the
"extract-phpdoc" target ?
:)
--
Jérôme Renard
http://39web.fr | http://jrenard.info | http://twitter.com/jeromerenard
Re: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
Posted by Benjamin Eberlei <ko...@beberlei.de>.
+1 on ant from me.
I worked with phing and almost every time converted to ant at some
point.
I havent used bash for build scripts at all though, so my opinion might
be biased.
On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 11:47:04 +0200, Manuel Pichler wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 20.04.2011, 08:54 +0200 schrieb Sebastian Bergmann:
>> Am 11.04.2011 22:13, schrieb Derick Rethans:
>> > I am afraid that nobody else uses Ant here, so I would oppose
>> that.
>>
>> It is safe to say that by now Ant is a standard technology in the
>> PHP
>> world. But oh well ...
>
> in this point I must agree with Sebastian, I would also say that Ant
> is
> standard in the php world. And one of it's greatest pros is support
> in
> most modern IDEs, that as far as I know no other build tool has.
>
> Greetings
> Manuel
Re: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
Posted by Manuel Pichler <ma...@manuel-pichler.de>.
Hello everyone,
Am Mittwoch, den 20.04.2011, 08:54 +0200 schrieb Sebastian Bergmann:
> Am 11.04.2011 22:13, schrieb Derick Rethans:
> > I am afraid that nobody else uses Ant here, so I would oppose that.
>
> It is safe to say that by now Ant is a standard technology in the PHP
> world. But oh well ...
in this point I must agree with Sebastian, I would also say that Ant is
standard in the php world. And one of it's greatest pros is support in
most modern IDEs, that as far as I know no other build tool has.
Greetings
Manuel
Re: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
Posted by Sebastian Bergmann <se...@apache.org>.
Am 11.04.2011 22:13, schrieb Derick Rethans:
> I am afraid that nobody else uses Ant here, so I would oppose that.
It is safe to say that by now Ant is a standard technology in the PHP
world. But oh well ...
--
Sebastian Bergmann Co-Founder and Principal Consultant
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/
Re: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
Posted by Tobias Schlitt <to...@schlitt.info>.
Hi,
I should leave some last words about this, which I hope clarify the base
of the issues Gavin and Derick have.
I recently tried to help Jerome via Jabber to get the website build
script to run on his Mac. We failed on many of the inconsistencies
between shell commands on the two systems (e.g. cp) and the quick
solution was to replace the current make file with something else. Since
we both knew ant and since ant is widely used, this sounded like the
perfect solution for a quick migration to solve our problem.
There was no intention to silently replace the current Makefile with ant
and go with it in the future. I'm sorry that it appeared to some people
that way, here on the list. I can understand Derick to be upset, if he
interpreted it like this.
Anyway, as Julien pointed out, we should find a consensus on a build
system which we all support. And as I recently discovered, this should
be a well thought out thing, since we should stay with a single system
for all build stuff (e.g. release management, CI, etc).
So, let's move on and see the website thingies as a proofs of concepts
for a build system.
Cheers,
Toby
--
Tobias Schlitt http://schlitt.info GPG Key: 0xC462BC14
Want to hire me? Need quality assurance? http://qafoo.com
eZ Components are Zeta Components now! http://bit.ly/9S7zbn
Re: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
Posted by Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com>.
> Anyway it's ASF here, let's look for consensus :)
and here are my 2 cents...
have used ant for long time and like it very much. Phing by the way is
a php specific ant version.
For log4php we have used maven with success. With its multimodules it
might be a good choice for zeta also.
However, I don't think make is a good choice and definitely prefer
ant. I mean...make! Its so 90ties! ;-)
I guess its also possible to have both build mechanisms in place? At
least for a while, and then one can see how it works out.
Cheers
Re: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
Posted by Julien Vermillard <jv...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 11:04 AM, Derick Rethans <de...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Gav... wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Derick Rethans wrote:
>> >
>> > On Mon, 11 Apr 2011, Jerome Renard wrote:
>> >
>> > > I started to create an Ant based version of the Makefile available in
>> > > website/
>> > >
>> > > The problem with the Makefile is that it does not work at all on Mac
>> > > Os X and is kind of hard to read.
>> >
>> > I am afraid that nobody else uses Ant here, so I would oppose that.
>>
>> Have you asked every user of Zetacomponents whether or not they use
>> Ant? Where are the emails and replies for that?
>
> This is not a user thing; it's something to maintain the website of this
> project. So this is irrelevant.
>
>> This is an open source project in an open source world housed at an
>> open source organisation. You cannot oppose volunteers scratching
>> their own itch. If jerome wants to provide an Ant alternative I do not
>> see the harm.
>
> I do. If you move away from something that we call can maintain, so
> something that less people can maintain, I think that's the wrong
> direction.
>
>> If Jerome then wants to replace Make with Ant then that is another
>> matter but still something that 'you' personally cannot oppose, that
>> is a decision for the Podling PMC or the Incubator PMC, no one person
>> has power here and the sooner folks realise this the sooner you might
>> start attracting those> new committers your board report said you
>> needed.
>
> Of course I can oppose to replacing Make with Ant. It simple means I am
> stating that I am against it:
>
> op·pose
> /əˈpoʊz/ Show Spelled [uh-pohz] verb, -posed, -pos·ing.
>
> –verb (used with object)
> 1. to act against or provide resistance to; combat.> --
> And new committers we need for code, that's for sure.
>
> cheers,
> Derick
>
Anyway it's ASF here, let's look for consensus :)
Julien
RE: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
Posted by Derick Rethans <de...@apache.org>.
On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Gav... wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2011, Derick Rethans wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 11 Apr 2011, Jerome Renard wrote:
> >
> > > I started to create an Ant based version of the Makefile available in
> > > website/
> > >
> > > The problem with the Makefile is that it does not work at all on Mac
> > > Os X and is kind of hard to read.
> >
> > I am afraid that nobody else uses Ant here, so I would oppose that.
>
> Have you asked every user of Zetacomponents whether or not they use
> Ant? Where are the emails and replies for that?
This is not a user thing; it's something to maintain the website of this
project. So this is irrelevant.
> This is an open source project in an open source world housed at an
> open source organisation. You cannot oppose volunteers scratching
> their own itch. If jerome wants to provide an Ant alternative I do not
> see the harm.
I do. If you move away from something that we call can maintain, so
something that less people can maintain, I think that's the wrong
direction.
> If Jerome then wants to replace Make with Ant then that is another
> matter but still something that 'you' personally cannot oppose, that
> is a decision for the Podling PMC or the Incubator PMC, no one person
> has power here and the sooner folks realise this the sooner you might
> start attracting those> new committers your board report said you
> needed.
Of course I can oppose to replacing Make with Ant. It simple means I am
stating that I am against it:
op·pose
/əˈpoʊz/ Show Spelled [uh-pohz] verb, -posed, -pos·ing.
–verb (used with object)
1. to act against or provide resistance to; combat.
And new committers we need for code, that's for sure.
cheers,
Derick
--
http://derickrethans.nl | http://xdebug.org
Like Xdebug? Consider a donation: http://xdebug.org/donate.php
twitter: @derickr and @xdebug
Re: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
Posted by Sebastian Bergmann <se...@apache.org>.
Am 12.04.2011 00:46, schrieb Gav...:
> This is an open source project in an open source world housed at an
> open source organisation. [...] 'you' personally cannot oppose, that
> is a decision for the Podling PMC or the Incubator PMC
Statements like this make me wonder whether I want to be affiliated with
Apache and/or Zeta Components.
--
Sebastian Bergmann Co-Founder and Principal Consultant
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/ http://thePHP.cc/
Re: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
Posted by Jerome Renard <je...@gmail.com>.
Hi Gavin,
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 12:46 AM, Gav... <ga...@16degrees.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Derick Rethans [mailto:derick@apache.org]
>> Sent: Tuesday, 12 April 2011 6:13 AM
>> To: zeta-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
>>
>> On Mon, 11 Apr 2011, Jerome Renard wrote:
>>
>> > I started to create an Ant based version of the Makefile available in
>> > website/
>> >
>> > The problem with the Makefile is that it does not work at all on Mac
>> > Os X and is kind of hard to read.
>>
>> I am afraid that nobody else uses Ant here, so I would oppose that.
>
> Have you asked every user of Zetacomponents whether or not they use
> Ant? Where are the emails and replies for that?
>
> This is an open source project in an open source world housed at an
> open source organisation. You cannot oppose volunteers scratching
> their own itch. If jerome wants to provide an Ant alternative I
> do not see the harm.
>
> If Jerome then wants to replace Make with Ant then that is another matter
> but still something that 'you' personally cannot oppose, that is a decision
> for the Podling PMC or the Incubator PMC, no one person has power here
> and the sooner folks realise this the sooner you might start attracting
> those
> new committers your board report said you needed.
Well I think I should have explained the context which lead me to translate
the Makefile to its Ant equivalent.
At the end of last week I was discussing with Tobias as couple of things about
the documentation and patches I had for it. I then realized the Makefile simply
did not work on my laptop and after spending quite some time to fix stuff here
and there with no acceptable results I thought it would be easier and faster to
use something more cross-platform than this Makefile.
The choice of Ant came naturally because:
1. it is cross-platform (well if you do not use system specific
executables of course :))
2. it is an ASF project
So using a ASF cross-platform tool looked like the right choice to me.
--
Jérôme Renard
http://39web.fr | http://jrenard.info | http://twitter.com/jeromerenard
RE: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
Posted by "Gav..." <ga...@16degrees.com.au>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Derick Rethans [mailto:derick@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, 12 April 2011 6:13 AM
> To: zeta-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
>
> On Mon, 11 Apr 2011, Jerome Renard wrote:
>
> > I started to create an Ant based version of the Makefile available in
> > website/
> >
> > The problem with the Makefile is that it does not work at all on Mac
> > Os X and is kind of hard to read.
>
> I am afraid that nobody else uses Ant here, so I would oppose that.
Have you asked every user of Zetacomponents whether or not they use
Ant? Where are the emails and replies for that?
This is an open source project in an open source world housed at an
open source organisation. You cannot oppose volunteers scratching
their own itch. If jerome wants to provide an Ant alternative I
do not see the harm.
If Jerome then wants to replace Make with Ant then that is another matter
but still something that 'you' personally cannot oppose, that is a decision
for the Podling PMC or the Incubator PMC, no one person has power here
and the sooner folks realise this the sooner you might start attracting
those
new committers your board report said you needed.
Gav...
>
> Derick
>
> --
> http://derickrethans.nl | http://xdebug.org Like Xdebug? Consider a
> donation: http://xdebug.org/donate.php
> twitter: @derickr and @xdebug
Re: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
Posted by Derick Rethans <de...@apache.org>.
On Mon, 11 Apr 2011, Jerome Renard wrote:
> I started to create an Ant based version of the Makefile available in
> website/
>
> The problem with the Makefile is that it does not work at all on Mac
> Os X and is kind of hard to read.
I am afraid that nobody else uses Ant here, so I would oppose that.
Derick
--
http://derickrethans.nl | http://xdebug.org
Like Xdebug? Consider a donation: http://xdebug.org/donate.php
twitter: @derickr and @xdebug
Re: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
Posted by Gaetano Giunta <gi...@gmail.com>.
Jerome Renard <je...@gmail.com> wrote on 12/04/2011 07:23:
> Hi Gaetano,
>
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Gaetano Giunta
> <gi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Jerome Renard wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I started to create an Ant based version of the Makefile available in
>>> website/
>>>
>>> The problem with the Makefile is that it does not work at all on Mac Os X
>>> and
>>> is kind of hard to read.
>>
>> Thanks for the work but I find ant kind of not working on windows (a lot of
>> tasks still do rely on cli tools) an extremely hard to read.
>>
>
> Well I tried to use ant targets as much as possible in order to avoid direct CLI
> accesses. By reading this message I realize I did not do a good enough job as
> a few CLI calls are still system dependant (#fail) the calls are :
> - svn
> - which (for which phpdoc)
> - php
>
> I will provide properties to define the path to each of them. That way
> everyone can
> control the path to SVN, PHP etc, etc
>
> Note about the SVN CLI calls:
> Initially I wanted to use the native Ant SVN tasks, but I failed at
> grabbing them through
> Ivy (the ant dependency manager used in the build file when you run
> ant-install-dependencies).
> So I falled back on a standard CLI call.
>
>> What about migrating to pake instead?
>> . based on php, should be runnable everywhere the zetac are
>> . cross platform
>> . increases interaction with the rest of the php community
>>
>> You can look at
>> http://svn.projects.ez.no/ezextensionbuilder/branches/pake_based_rewrite/
>> for a bootstrapping, self-updating pakefile script (of corse, based on JC's
>> original ant work ;-) ). it uses the zetac for generating html docs out of
>> .rst and for creating zip/tgz tarballs
>>
>
> Well, this serves another purpose. The goal of the website's build
> file is to make
> people able to update and contribute to the documentation by either
> providing patches
> or committing changes directly. But in order to test their changes
> they need to rebuild
> the website. For the moment using the Makefile works fine for anyone
> who uses Linux.
> For other users that's not possible and that possibly blocks people
> who would be interested
> in improving the documentation.
>
> Using Pake (or any other PHP based build system) is to make people
> able to modify and
> (why not) extend the build system. I would say it is a lower priority
> as if you can not build
> the documentation, you will not contribute to it and you will
> obviously find no point in updating
> or extending the build system.
>
Not to split hair or make this thread overly long, but I fail to see your point here.
Using a build system's goal is never for "having fun hacking it" in the first place, but to produce a build, be it docs, the website, binaries, or a tarball of
sources.
Making the build script easier to hack and more portable is just a way to make sure that the 1st goal is reached, by giving more people a chance to understand
it, test it on their own environment and submit patches / improvements.
bye
Gaetano
Re: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
Posted by Jerome Renard <je...@gmail.com>.
Hi Gaetano,
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Gaetano Giunta
<gi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jerome Renard wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I started to create an Ant based version of the Makefile available in
>> website/
>>
>> The problem with the Makefile is that it does not work at all on Mac Os X
>> and
>> is kind of hard to read.
>
> Thanks for the work but I find ant kind of not working on windows (a lot of
> tasks still do rely on cli tools) an extremely hard to read.
>
Well I tried to use ant targets as much as possible in order to avoid direct CLI
accesses. By reading this message I realize I did not do a good enough job as
a few CLI calls are still system dependant (#fail) the calls are :
- svn
- which (for which phpdoc)
- php
I will provide properties to define the path to each of them. That way
everyone can
control the path to SVN, PHP etc, etc
Note about the SVN CLI calls:
Initially I wanted to use the native Ant SVN tasks, but I failed at
grabbing them through
Ivy (the ant dependency manager used in the build file when you run
ant-install-dependencies).
So I falled back on a standard CLI call.
> What about migrating to pake instead?
> . based on php, should be runnable everywhere the zetac are
> . cross platform
> . increases interaction with the rest of the php community
>
> You can look at
> http://svn.projects.ez.no/ezextensionbuilder/branches/pake_based_rewrite/
> for a bootstrapping, self-updating pakefile script (of corse, based on JC's
> original ant work ;-) ). it uses the zetac for generating html docs out of
> .rst and for creating zip/tgz tarballs
>
Well, this serves another purpose. The goal of the website's build
file is to make
people able to update and contribute to the documentation by either
providing patches
or committing changes directly. But in order to test their changes
they need to rebuild
the website. For the moment using the Makefile works fine for anyone
who uses Linux.
For other users that's not possible and that possibly blocks people
who would be interested
in improving the documentation.
Using Pake (or any other PHP based build system) is to make people
able to modify and
(why not) extend the build system. I would say it is a lower priority
as if you can not build
the documentation, you will not contribute to it and you will
obviously find no point in updating
or extending the build system.
:)
--
Jérôme Renard
http://39web.fr | http://jrenard.info | http://twitter.com/jeromerenard
Re: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
Posted by Gaetano Giunta <gi...@gmail.com>.
Gav... wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Gaetano Giunta [mailto:giunta.gaetano@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, 12 April 2011 6:07 AM
>> To: zeta-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
>>
>> Jerome Renard wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I started to create an Ant based version of the Makefile available in
>>> website/
>>>
>>> The problem with the Makefile is that it does not work at all on Mac
>>> Os X and is kind of hard to read.
>> Thanks for the work but I find ant kind of not working on windows (a lot of
>> tasks still do rely on cli tools) an extremely hard to read.
> Ant works fine on Windows, having used both for years.
Ant as a tool is definitely supported, but, in my limited experience, with too many warts.
Examples of things that made me rewrite the ant script for ezp extensions in php:
. no built-in task to generate an md5 of a file (and on windows no built-in md5 command, too many variants exist that produce different output and accept
different options)
. path separator chars are not normalized in ant, they are in php (to / )
. many other core tasks are not 100% identical on all platforms, either in their output or supported options, when you go read the docs
> Gav...
>
>> What about migrating to pake instead?
>> . based on php, should be runnable everywhere the zetac are . cross
>> platform . increases interaction with the rest of the php community
>>
>> You can look at
>> http://svn.projects.ez.no/ezextensionbuilder/branches/pake_based_rewrit
>> e/ for a bootstrapping, self-updating pakefile script (of corse, based on JC's
>> original ant work ;-) ). it uses the zetac for generating html docs out of .rst
>> and for creating zip/tgz tarballs
>>
>> bye
>> Gaetano
>>
>>> I committed what I did in website/ so feel free to svn up and to run:
>>> ant install-ant-dependencies
>>>
>>> After that you can run ant -p in order to see the list of available targets.
>>>
>>> The Ant biuld file does not work yet. I can not test the
>>> "extract-phpdoc" target as I think I miss the high level view on how
>>> the process should be launched.
>>>
>>> What I would like to fix first is the extract-phpdoc target, for now
>>> it does not work because there is no component in
>>> content/documentation/trunk/ but where these components are
>> supposed
>>> to come from ? Don't you think the "tutorials" target should be a
>>> dependency of the "extract-phpdoc" target ?
>>>
>>> :)
>
>
RE: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
Posted by "Gav..." <ga...@16degrees.com.au>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gaetano Giunta [mailto:giunta.gaetano@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, 12 April 2011 6:07 AM
> To: zeta-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
>
> Jerome Renard wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I started to create an Ant based version of the Makefile available in
> > website/
> >
> > The problem with the Makefile is that it does not work at all on Mac
> > Os X and is kind of hard to read.
>
> Thanks for the work but I find ant kind of not working on windows (a lot of
> tasks still do rely on cli tools) an extremely hard to read.
Ant works fine on Windows, having used both for years.
Gav...
>
> What about migrating to pake instead?
> . based on php, should be runnable everywhere the zetac are . cross
> platform . increases interaction with the rest of the php community
>
> You can look at
> http://svn.projects.ez.no/ezextensionbuilder/branches/pake_based_rewrit
> e/ for a bootstrapping, self-updating pakefile script (of corse, based on JC's
> original ant work ;-) ). it uses the zetac for generating html docs out of .rst
> and for creating zip/tgz tarballs
>
> bye
> Gaetano
>
> > I committed what I did in website/ so feel free to svn up and to run:
> > ant install-ant-dependencies
> >
> > After that you can run ant -p in order to see the list of available targets.
> >
> > The Ant biuld file does not work yet. I can not test the
> > "extract-phpdoc" target as I think I miss the high level view on how
> > the process should be launched.
> >
> > What I would like to fix first is the extract-phpdoc target, for now
> > it does not work because there is no component in
> > content/documentation/trunk/ but where these components are
> supposed
> > to come from ? Don't you think the "tutorials" target should be a
> > dependency of the "extract-phpdoc" target ?
> >
> > :)
Re: [zeta-dev] Migration from Make to Ant
Posted by Gaetano Giunta <gi...@gmail.com>.
Jerome Renard wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I started to create an Ant based version of the Makefile available in website/
>
> The problem with the Makefile is that it does not work at all on Mac Os X and
> is kind of hard to read.
Thanks for the work but I find ant kind of not working on windows (a lot of tasks still do rely on cli tools) an extremely hard to read.
What about migrating to pake instead?
. based on php, should be runnable everywhere the zetac are
. cross platform
. increases interaction with the rest of the php community
You can look at http://svn.projects.ez.no/ezextensionbuilder/branches/pake_based_rewrite/ for a bootstrapping, self-updating pakefile script (of corse, based on
JC's original ant work ;-) ). it uses the zetac for generating html docs out of .rst and for creating zip/tgz tarballs
bye
Gaetano
> I committed what I did in website/ so feel free to svn up and to run:
> ant install-ant-dependencies
>
> After that you can run ant -p in order to see the list of available targets.
>
> The Ant biuld file does not work yet. I can not test the
> "extract-phpdoc" target as
> I think I miss the high level view on how the process should be launched.
>
> What I would like to fix first is the extract-phpdoc target, for now
> it does not work because
> there is no component in content/documentation/trunk/ but where these
> components are
> supposed to come from ? Don't you think the "tutorials" target should
> be a dependency of the
> "extract-phpdoc" target ?
>
> :)