You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@buildr.apache.org by Antoine Toulme <an...@lunar-ocean.com> on 2010/06/11 01:41:25 UTC
Buildr 1.4.0 RC4
All, Buildr 1.4.0 RC4 is available here:
http://people.apache.org/~toulmean/buildr/1.4.0RC4/
Please play with it. This is very likely our GA. I will open a vote for it
tomorrow.
Thanks,
Antoine
Re: Why stop so short
Posted by Alex Boisvert <al...@gmail.com>.
Hey Paul,
Sounds like Buildr sparked an impassioned reaction in you :)
I agree there's a whole lot of software around build, continuous
integration, configuration/lifecycle management that could suck less. We're
not "stopping here" but Buildr's scope is relatively well defined at the
moment, although as an Apache TLP, we can certainly grow in any of the
different directions you mentioned.
I probably don't need to tell you this but what's needed, beyond vision, is
typically one (sometimes two) very motivated individual to lay the
foundation for that expansion in such a way that will incite other people to
join. There needs to be a critical mass of software written up-front to
kick-start things. No roadmap or vision can replace that. And it's not a
sufficient condition to guarantee traction -- merely a necessary one.
The good news is there's a good likelihood you'll find interested people
and, perhaps, some who share your passion and ambitions in this community.
With some luck, they might even have a lot of free time too :)
I certainly encourage you to pursue this. If something comes out of it and
the conditions are right, I believe Buildr would be a great community to
host the project(s). Just be prepared for what sounds like a fairly
engaged and arduous journey. Bootstrapping open-source projects can
require a lot of effort and dedication; even more so for projects not
directly tied to developer's itch.
cheers and welcome!
alex
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 9:07 PM, Paul Kramer <kr...@me.com> wrote:
> Hey Folks,
>
> You are doing something I think is great work in Buildr. But why stop so
> short.
>
> I'm my mind, all of the infrastructure should be developed with rapid
> development in mind. To me that equates to Python/Django and Ruby/Rails, and
> not only that. There is HUGE opportunity in the embedded space. Look at the
> rapid growth of the mobile market. The folks in this space are looking
> around and what do they see. Lots of Java based tools (cruise-control,
> hudson, teamcity, and on and on). That java stuff does not fit into that
> space at all.
>
> So why stop short with Buildr. Buildr could easily be extended to provide
> its own continuous integration, done in ruby/rails of course.
>
> Consider the following: http://qbal.mozdev.org/ circa 1999-2000
> http://qbal.mozdev.org/oldQbal.jpeg This was a proof of concept based on
> earlier work I've done. It was 100% javascript. I'm going to ramp this stuff
> up again, but this time I want to use ruby/rails/javascript
>
> Here is the thing. I've been doing this stuff for a long long time. You can
> take a moment to look at www.qbalsoftware.com to get an idea of my
> background. I'd like to start collaborating on some solutions that turn
> things upside down and produce some results that help teams fly!
>
> Let me know if you are interested in talking further.
>
> Regards -- Kramer
>
> I live in Mt View (silicon valley) and this is my wing-man Cosmo.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Why stop so short
Posted by Paul Kramer <kr...@me.com>.
Antoine,
Yeah I can understand your need for resources around Buildr. I did not mean to suggest the team is falling short of my expectations. No just the opposite.
Buildr is unique to me in that... it went completely against the grain of offering a non-java utility to build java code. What I'm saying is that, "I don't see Buildr as a new build solution". I see Buildr as a group of people that went against status-quo and said there has got to be a better way!
What I'm suggesting is that folks consider a larger scope. A grander vision. There are HUGE opportunities to turn things upside-down. The mobile industry is providing that vehicle!!!! The Buildr team can do much more! Why do I say this. Because I've been fixing build systems for years, and I've always said, build systems are easy, its the source tree thats hard. If the product has not been designed and implemented with distinct layers and modules, then the build system will be complex ... and so too every other aspect of testing and productizing. The #1 problem software team have is managing change. What I'm suggesting is that perhaps you and the team after this release, consider going after the big kahuna!
Your team has started something! But there are MUCH bigger fish to fry!
There is huge confusion in the mobile market. Its like the 1980's but 10 times more complicated. In the 80's we had everyone and his uncle making hardware and software and there was lots of confusion because of all the competing platforms. The mobile market is just the same but much much bigger.
It will not be long before most computing other than servers will be mobile. And if we look at the technologies used as part of the product life cycle to deliver these modern systems, they are rooted in the 1980's and 1990's. Nothing new... Consider GIT and the other distributed source code control tools... 1980's man.... HP-UX had distributed branches using KCS and internal tools built on top of RCS (although people still shared the branch... the mechanics were there). Sun had smerge in late 80's to merge SCCS trunks, and then smoosh which became nse-lite, which became code-manager, which led to bitkeeper, which led to GIT.
NONE of the tools that are in vogue today satisfy the needs of software development teams today or tomorrow.
Thats what I meant by "stop so short". I think your team can take Buildr as a starting point and build outwards.
Regards -- Kramer
On Jun 10, 2010, at 9:28 PM, Antoine Toulme wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> thanks for the kind words, and hello to Cosmo :)
>
> We have been preparing this release for quite a while with our meager
> resources.
>
> We're sorry to fall short your expectations. If you can devote some time to
> our project, we would be ravished if you could open bugs for the items you
> mention and discuss there. We'd be happy to accept your patches.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Antoine
>
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 21:07, Paul Kramer <kr...@me.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey Folks,
>>
>> You are doing something I think is great work in Buildr. But why stop so
>> short.
>>
>> I'm my mind, all of the infrastructure should be developed with rapid
>> development in mind. To me that equates to Python/Django and Ruby/Rails, and
>> not only that. There is HUGE opportunity in the embedded space. Look at the
>> rapid growth of the mobile market. The folks in this space are looking
>> around and what do they see. Lots of Java based tools (cruise-control,
>> hudson, teamcity, and on and on). That java stuff does not fit into that
>> space at all.
>>
>> So why stop short with Buildr. Buildr could easily be extended to provide
>> its own continuous integration, done in ruby/rails of course.
>>
>> Consider the following: http://qbal.mozdev.org/ circa 1999-2000
>> http://qbal.mozdev.org/oldQbal.jpeg This was a proof of concept based on
>> earlier work I've done. It was 100% javascript. I'm going to ramp this stuff
>> up again, but this time I want to use ruby/rails/javascript
>>
>> Here is the thing. I've been doing this stuff for a long long time. You can
>> take a moment to look at www.qbalsoftware.com to get an idea of my
>> background. I'd like to start collaborating on some solutions that turn
>> things upside down and produce some results that help teams fly!
>>
>> Let me know if you are interested in talking further.
>>
>> Regards -- Kramer
>>
>> I live in Mt View (silicon valley) and this is my wing-man Cosmo.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Re: Why stop so short
Posted by Antoine Toulme <an...@lunar-ocean.com>.
Hi Paul,
thanks for the kind words, and hello to Cosmo :)
We have been preparing this release for quite a while with our meager
resources.
We're sorry to fall short your expectations. If you can devote some time to
our project, we would be ravished if you could open bugs for the items you
mention and discuss there. We'd be happy to accept your patches.
Thanks,
Antoine
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 21:07, Paul Kramer <kr...@me.com> wrote:
> Hey Folks,
>
> You are doing something I think is great work in Buildr. But why stop so
> short.
>
> I'm my mind, all of the infrastructure should be developed with rapid
> development in mind. To me that equates to Python/Django and Ruby/Rails, and
> not only that. There is HUGE opportunity in the embedded space. Look at the
> rapid growth of the mobile market. The folks in this space are looking
> around and what do they see. Lots of Java based tools (cruise-control,
> hudson, teamcity, and on and on). That java stuff does not fit into that
> space at all.
>
> So why stop short with Buildr. Buildr could easily be extended to provide
> its own continuous integration, done in ruby/rails of course.
>
> Consider the following: http://qbal.mozdev.org/ circa 1999-2000
> http://qbal.mozdev.org/oldQbal.jpeg This was a proof of concept based on
> earlier work I've done. It was 100% javascript. I'm going to ramp this stuff
> up again, but this time I want to use ruby/rails/javascript
>
> Here is the thing. I've been doing this stuff for a long long time. You can
> take a moment to look at www.qbalsoftware.com to get an idea of my
> background. I'd like to start collaborating on some solutions that turn
> things upside down and produce some results that help teams fly!
>
> Let me know if you are interested in talking further.
>
> Regards -- Kramer
>
> I live in Mt View (silicon valley) and this is my wing-man Cosmo.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Why stop so short
Posted by Paul Kramer <kr...@me.com>.
Hey Folks,
You are doing something I think is great work in Buildr. But why stop so short.
I'm my mind, all of the infrastructure should be developed with rapid development in mind. To me that equates to Python/Django and Ruby/Rails, and not only that. There is HUGE opportunity in the embedded space. Look at the rapid growth of the mobile market. The folks in this space are looking around and what do they see. Lots of Java based tools (cruise-control, hudson, teamcity, and on and on). That java stuff does not fit into that space at all.
So why stop short with Buildr. Buildr could easily be extended to provide its own continuous integration, done in ruby/rails of course.
Consider the following: http://qbal.mozdev.org/ circa 1999-2000 http://qbal.mozdev.org/oldQbal.jpeg This was a proof of concept based on earlier work I've done. It was 100% javascript. I'm going to ramp this stuff up again, but this time I want to use ruby/rails/javascript
Here is the thing. I've been doing this stuff for a long long time. You can take a moment to look at www.qbalsoftware.com to get an idea of my background. I'd like to start collaborating on some solutions that turn things upside down and produce some results that help teams fly!
Let me know if you are interested in talking further.
Regards -- Kramer
I live in Mt View (silicon valley) and this is my wing-man Cosmo.
Re: New kind of bogus circular dependency in 1.4.0RC4
Posted by Antoine Toulme <an...@lunar-ocean.com>.
I'm thinking it's not new and not blocking, though an interesting one. The
way I see it, it might be invalid. We can probably take a look at it in the
coming weeks.
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 20:44, Rhett Sutphin <rh...@detailedbalance.net>wrote:
> Hi Antoine,
>
> On Jun 10, 2010, at 6:41 PM, Antoine Toulme wrote:
>
> > All, Buildr 1.4.0 RC4 is available here:
> >
> > http://people.apache.org/~toulmean/buildr/1.4.0RC4/
> >
> > Please play with it. This is very likely our GA. I will open a vote for
> it
> > tomorrow.
>
> First, let me say thanks for all your work on this release, setting up the
> CI builds and the rest.
>
> So far, I have run into one problem with 1.4.0RC4 which does not show on
> 1.3.5. (I haven't tried with any of the previous RCs, so I don't know if
> it's new with this one.) I've filed a bug for it:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-454
>
> As I noted in the issue report, though, I don't think it should block 1.4.0
> final because it is easily worked-around.
>
> I'll continue testing.
>
> Thanks,
> Rhett
New kind of bogus circular dependency in 1.4.0RC4
Posted by Rhett Sutphin <rh...@detailedbalance.net>.
Hi Antoine,
On Jun 10, 2010, at 6:41 PM, Antoine Toulme wrote:
> All, Buildr 1.4.0 RC4 is available here:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~toulmean/buildr/1.4.0RC4/
>
> Please play with it. This is very likely our GA. I will open a vote for it
> tomorrow.
First, let me say thanks for all your work on this release, setting up the CI builds and the rest.
So far, I have run into one problem with 1.4.0RC4 which does not show on 1.3.5. (I haven't tried with any of the previous RCs, so I don't know if it's new with this one.) I've filed a bug for it:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-454
As I noted in the issue report, though, I don't think it should block 1.4.0 final because it is easily worked-around.
I'll continue testing.
Thanks,
Rhett
Re: Buildr 1.4.0 RC4
Posted by Peter Schröder <ps...@blau.de>.
i will put it on our ci-server with jruby 1.5.1 today and report back
Am 11.06.2010 um 01:41 schrieb Antoine Toulme:
> All, Buildr 1.4.0 RC4 is available here:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~toulmean/buildr/1.4.0RC4/
>
> Please play with it. This is very likely our GA. I will open a vote for it
> tomorrow.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Antoine
Fwd: Buildr 1.4.0 RC4
Posted by Antoine Toulme <an...@lunar-ocean.com>.
Forwarding this to the user list.
For groovy, let me see....
the doc says to do this:
artifact_ns['Buildr::Compiler::Groovyc'].groovy = '1.7.1'
Feel free to try it out.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Peter Schröder <ps...@blau.de>
Date: Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 06:55
Subject: Re: Buildr 1.4.0 RC4
To: "antoine@lunar-ocean.com" <an...@lunar-ocean.com>
there were no problems with our continous builds.
i ran some test against my buildr-examples (
http://github.com/phoet/buildr-examples) and there were problems with
circular dependencies, that i could fix locally.
the only thing that did not work was:
# configure a different groovy-version
Buildr::Groovy::Groovyc::REQUIRES.groovy = '1.6.0'
http://github.com/phoet/buildr-examples/blob/master/building/compiler/buildfile
even though i could not remember why one would use it.
Re: Buildr 1.4.0 RC4
Posted by Antoine Toulme <an...@lunar-ocean.com>.
Did it work for you ?
Any validation from our users helps.
Antoine
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 23:42, Peter Schröder <ps...@blau.de> wrote:
> server is currently not reachable. tests rescheduled for monday
>
>
> Am 11.06.2010 um 01:41 schrieb Antoine Toulme:
>
> > All, Buildr 1.4.0 RC4 is available here:
> >
> > http://people.apache.org/~toulmean/buildr/1.4.0RC4/
> >
> > Please play with it. This is very likely our GA. I will open a vote for
> it
> > tomorrow.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Antoine
>
>
Re: Buildr 1.4.0 RC4
Posted by Peter Schröder <ps...@blau.de>.
server is currently not reachable. tests rescheduled for monday
Am 11.06.2010 um 01:41 schrieb Antoine Toulme:
> All, Buildr 1.4.0 RC4 is available here:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~toulmean/buildr/1.4.0RC4/
>
> Please play with it. This is very likely our GA. I will open a vote for it
> tomorrow.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Antoine
Re: Buildr 1.4.0 RC4
Posted by Alex Boisvert <al...@gmail.com>.
Yes, it works fine for me.
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 12:29 AM, Peter Schröder <ps...@blau.de> wrote:
> is anyone able to open that link?
>
> Am 11.06.2010 um 01:41 schrieb Antoine Toulme:
>
> > All, Buildr 1.4.0 RC4 is available here:
> >
> > http://people.apache.org/~toulmean/buildr/1.4.0RC4/<http://people.apache.org/%7Etoulmean/buildr/1.4.0RC4/>
> >
> > Please play with it. This is very likely our GA. I will open a vote for
> it
> > tomorrow.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Antoine
>
>
Re: Buildr 1.4.0 RC4
Posted by Peter Schröder <ps...@blau.de>.
is anyone able to open that link?
Am 11.06.2010 um 01:41 schrieb Antoine Toulme:
> All, Buildr 1.4.0 RC4 is available here:
>
> http://people.apache.org/~toulmean/buildr/1.4.0RC4/
>
> Please play with it. This is very likely our GA. I will open a vote for it
> tomorrow.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Antoine
Re: buildr 1.4 as --pre release
Posted by Peter Schröder <ps...@blau.de>.
maybe it's this:
gem help install|grep prerelease
--prerelease Install prerelease versions of a gem if
prereleases.
Am 14.06.2010 um 20:39 schrieb Antoine Toulme:
> That's a good idea. I quickly searched how to do a gem push as prerelease
> and could not find anything. Do you know how to do that ?
>
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 00:31, Peter Schröder <ps...@blau.de> wrote:
>
>> is it possible to publish the latest release candidate as a gem?
>>
>> gem install buildr --pre
>>
>> i think this would be very convenient and is a best practice in the ruby
>> community
>>
>> king regards,
>> peter
Re: buildr 1.4 as --pre release
Posted by Antoine Toulme <an...@lunar-ocean.com>.
The word on #ruby is "just end the gem version with a letter and it will be
considered a prerelease".
Hmm, I didn't change the version for 1.4.0 RC4.
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 12:24, Peter Schröder <ps...@blau.de> wrote:
> i don't know exactly but i think that you can push a gem with gemspec like
> 1.4.0.beta.1
>
> Am 14.06.2010 um 20:39 schrieb Antoine Toulme:
>
> > That's a good idea. I quickly searched how to do a gem push as prerelease
> > and could not find anything. Do you know how to do that ?
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 00:31, Peter Schröder <ps...@blau.de> wrote:
> >
> >> is it possible to publish the latest release candidate as a gem?
> >>
> >> gem install buildr --pre
> >>
> >> i think this would be very convenient and is a best practice in the ruby
> >> community
> >>
> >> king regards,
> >> peter
>
>
Re: buildr 1.4 as --pre release
Posted by Peter Schröder <ps...@blau.de>.
i don't know exactly but i think that you can push a gem with gemspec like 1.4.0.beta.1
Am 14.06.2010 um 20:39 schrieb Antoine Toulme:
> That's a good idea. I quickly searched how to do a gem push as prerelease
> and could not find anything. Do you know how to do that ?
>
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 00:31, Peter Schröder <ps...@blau.de> wrote:
>
>> is it possible to publish the latest release candidate as a gem?
>>
>> gem install buildr --pre
>>
>> i think this would be very convenient and is a best practice in the ruby
>> community
>>
>> king regards,
>> peter
Re: buildr 1.4 as --pre release
Posted by Antoine Toulme <an...@lunar-ocean.com>.
That's a good idea. I quickly searched how to do a gem push as prerelease
and could not find anything. Do you know how to do that ?
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 00:31, Peter Schröder <ps...@blau.de> wrote:
> is it possible to publish the latest release candidate as a gem?
>
> gem install buildr --pre
>
> i think this would be very convenient and is a best practice in the ruby
> community
>
> king regards,
> peter
buildr 1.4 as --pre release
Posted by Peter Schröder <ps...@blau.de>.
is it possible to publish the latest release candidate as a gem?
gem install buildr --pre
i think this would be very convenient and is a best practice in the ruby community
king regards,
peter