You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@zookeeper.apache.org by Patrick White <pw...@fb.com> on 2017/05/05 20:51:25 UTC
Ever considered using buck to build?
Howdy! I'm Patrick from the core systems team at Facebook, and I work on ZooKeeper and ZooKeeper accessories all day long.
Proposal: I want to add BUCK files to the zookeeper source tree.
Hear me out:
TL; DR - I want to hear everyone's thoughts and opinions on the matter.
At Facebook, we use buck (buckbuild.com) to build everything. Buck turns out to be a really nice build system. It's easy to set up and super fast. I love buck.
Ben put together some nice BUCK files that we use internally to build zookeeper and zkcli. Since we're already working to sync back with upstream, we'd love to get them in.
Pros:
Buck files are a lot easier to work with than maven, ant, or anything else
Buck's fast
These files do absolutely nothing for or against people who want to use maven or ant
'java_binary' generates a single executable file containing all the jars
Cons:
Not one of the "conventional" java build systems
BUCK files laying around are just trash for people not interested in them
Doesn't currently generate the typical layout of bin, conf, share, etc.
- *currently*, it could probably be done
Thanks,
Patrick
Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
Posted by Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>.
OK - I missed that. Thank you. Whew.
> On May 8, 2017, at 10:07 PM, Benjamin Reed <br...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> from patrick's response: "My intent at this point is not to replace
> anything, just to add the ability to build with buck." this isn't to
> move to a boutique build system. patrick is just suggesting that he
> can make available the build files we use inside facebook for others
> to try.
>
> ben
>
> On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 12:39 PM, Jordan Zimmerman
> <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
>> I beg you not to move to a boutique build system. Stay in Ant or go to Maven.
>>
>> ====================
>> Jordan Zimmerman
>>
>>> On May 8, 2017, at 9:16 PM, Patrick White <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> To address some points from over the weekend:
>>>
>>>>> I thought we were moving to Maven
>>>
>>>
>>> Yep. Nothing needs to change, and this doesn't impede those plans at all.
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Does it work on Jenkins?
>>>
>>>
>>> Again, by no means an expert. I downloaded jenkins and set up a test project to build with buck. Seems to work?
>>>
>>>>> Doesn't build a release-style tarball
>>>
>>>
>>> I took a first cut at this yesterday, and was able to build something that looks similar to the release tarball. There's still some layout matching to do, but it's moved from 'can it be done?' to 'just needs doing'. I'll keep chipping away at it.
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com>
>>> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 4:10:03 PM
>>> To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
>>>
>>>>> I thought we were moving to Maven at some point. Did that get sidelined?
>>>
>>> I think moving to maven is still the plan and there are definitely lots of
>>> interests on this - see ZOOKEEPER-1078
>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__issues.apache.org_jira_browse_ZOOKEEPER-2D1078&d=DwIBaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=V07zLXy_E8PWbo7ELpwwaA&m=CozSBvJ5x8vQXVCw5b67P2tQzP0MGXNWo4zAbWK6FVw&s=MOwi2wW3chHqUd0SM75G4va57XxNJaJMABx14LYhYys&e= >
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <jordan@jordanzimmerman.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I thought we were moving to Maven at some point. Did that get sidelined?
>>>>
>>>> -Jordan
>>>>
>>>>> On May 5, 2017, at 6:02 PM, Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this proposal intended to use BUCK to replace ant someday, or just add
>>>>> BUCK as an alternative build system? I thought it's not replacing ant,
>>>> but
>>>>> I want double check, because choosing a build system vs support multiple
>>>>> build system are different topics.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Patrick White <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My bad, I'll clarify.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Internally, we build and test with buck, but we don't worry about the
>>>>>> bin,conf,share,etc folders. So it's a thing that is possible (and I'll
>>>>>> certainly do it if there's interest) we just haven't put effort behind
>>>> it
>>>>>> because... well we don't use it that way.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> re: jenkins. uhhhh... I'll have to get back to you on that one. (never
>>>>>> used it, but I'll go download it and see what shakes loose)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>> From: Camille Fournier <ca...@apache.org>
>>>>>> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 2:11:15 PM
>>>>>> To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did you... Just list as a con that actually it currently won't work?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does it work on Jenkins?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On May 5, 2017 4:51 PM, "Patrick White" <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Howdy! I'm Patrick from the core systems team at Facebook, and I work
>>>> on
>>>>>>> ZooKeeper and ZooKeeper accessories all day long.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Proposal: I want to add BUCK files to the zookeeper source tree.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hear me out:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> TL; DR - I want to hear everyone's thoughts and opinions on the matter.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> At Facebook, we use buck (buckbuild.com) to build everything. Buck
>>>> turns
>>>>>>> out to be a really nice build system. It's easy to set up and super
>>>>>> fast. I
>>>>>>> love buck.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ben put together some nice BUCK files that we use internally to build
>>>>>>> zookeeper and zkcli. Since we're already working to sync back with
>>>>>>> upstream, we'd love to get them in.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pros:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Buck files are a lot easier to work with than maven, ant, or anything
>>>>>> else
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Buck's fast
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> These files do absolutely nothing for or against people who want to use
>>>>>>> maven or ant
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 'java_binary' generates a single executable file containing all the
>>>> jars
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cons:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not one of the "conventional" java build systems
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BUCK files laying around are just trash for people not interested in
>>>> them
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Doesn't currently generate the typical layout of bin, conf, share, etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - *currently*, it could probably be done
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Patrick
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>> Michael.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Cheers
>>> Michael.
Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
Posted by Benjamin Reed <br...@apache.org>.
from patrick's response: "My intent at this point is not to replace
anything, just to add the ability to build with buck." this isn't to
move to a boutique build system. patrick is just suggesting that he
can make available the build files we use inside facebook for others
to try.
ben
On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 12:39 PM, Jordan Zimmerman
<jo...@jordanzimmerman.com> wrote:
> I beg you not to move to a boutique build system. Stay in Ant or go to Maven.
>
> ====================
> Jordan Zimmerman
>
>> On May 8, 2017, at 9:16 PM, Patrick White <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> To address some points from over the weekend:
>>
>>>> I thought we were moving to Maven
>>
>>
>> Yep. Nothing needs to change, and this doesn't impede those plans at all.
>>
>>
>>>> Does it work on Jenkins?
>>
>>
>> Again, by no means an expert. I downloaded jenkins and set up a test project to build with buck. Seems to work?
>>
>>>> Doesn't build a release-style tarball
>>
>>
>> I took a first cut at this yesterday, and was able to build something that looks similar to the release tarball. There's still some layout matching to do, but it's moved from 'can it be done?' to 'just needs doing'. I'll keep chipping away at it.
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com>
>> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 4:10:03 PM
>> To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
>>
>>>> I thought we were moving to Maven at some point. Did that get sidelined?
>>
>> I think moving to maven is still the plan and there are definitely lots of
>> interests on this - see ZOOKEEPER-1078
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__issues.apache.org_jira_browse_ZOOKEEPER-2D1078&d=DwIBaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=V07zLXy_E8PWbo7ELpwwaA&m=CozSBvJ5x8vQXVCw5b67P2tQzP0MGXNWo4zAbWK6FVw&s=MOwi2wW3chHqUd0SM75G4va57XxNJaJMABx14LYhYys&e= >
>>
>> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <jordan@jordanzimmerman.com
>>> wrote:
>>
>>> I thought we were moving to Maven at some point. Did that get sidelined?
>>>
>>> -Jordan
>>>
>>>> On May 5, 2017, at 6:02 PM, Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Is this proposal intended to use BUCK to replace ant someday, or just add
>>>> BUCK as an alternative build system? I thought it's not replacing ant,
>>> but
>>>> I want double check, because choosing a build system vs support multiple
>>>> build system are different topics.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Patrick White <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> My bad, I'll clarify.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Internally, we build and test with buck, but we don't worry about the
>>>>> bin,conf,share,etc folders. So it's a thing that is possible (and I'll
>>>>> certainly do it if there's interest) we just haven't put effort behind
>>> it
>>>>> because... well we don't use it that way.
>>>>>
>>>>> re: jenkins. uhhhh... I'll have to get back to you on that one. (never
>>>>> used it, but I'll go download it and see what shakes loose)
>>>>>
>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>> From: Camille Fournier <ca...@apache.org>
>>>>> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 2:11:15 PM
>>>>> To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
>>>>>
>>>>> Did you... Just list as a con that actually it currently won't work?
>>>>>
>>>>> Does it work on Jenkins?
>>>>>
>>>>>> On May 5, 2017 4:51 PM, "Patrick White" <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Howdy! I'm Patrick from the core systems team at Facebook, and I work
>>> on
>>>>>> ZooKeeper and ZooKeeper accessories all day long.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Proposal: I want to add BUCK files to the zookeeper source tree.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hear me out:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TL; DR - I want to hear everyone's thoughts and opinions on the matter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At Facebook, we use buck (buckbuild.com) to build everything. Buck
>>> turns
>>>>>> out to be a really nice build system. It's easy to set up and super
>>>>> fast. I
>>>>>> love buck.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ben put together some nice BUCK files that we use internally to build
>>>>>> zookeeper and zkcli. Since we're already working to sync back with
>>>>>> upstream, we'd love to get them in.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pros:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Buck files are a lot easier to work with than maven, ant, or anything
>>>>> else
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Buck's fast
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These files do absolutely nothing for or against people who want to use
>>>>>> maven or ant
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 'java_binary' generates a single executable file containing all the
>>> jars
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cons:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not one of the "conventional" java build systems
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BUCK files laying around are just trash for people not interested in
>>> them
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Doesn't currently generate the typical layout of bin, conf, share, etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - *currently*, it could probably be done
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Patrick
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Cheers
>>>> Michael.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cheers
>> Michael.
Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
Posted by Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>.
I beg you not to move to a boutique build system. Stay in Ant or go to Maven.
====================
Jordan Zimmerman
> On May 8, 2017, at 9:16 PM, Patrick White <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
>
>
> To address some points from over the weekend:
>
>>> I thought we were moving to Maven
>
>
> Yep. Nothing needs to change, and this doesn't impede those plans at all.
>
>
>>> Does it work on Jenkins?
>
>
> Again, by no means an expert. I downloaded jenkins and set up a test project to build with buck. Seems to work?
>
>>> Doesn't build a release-style tarball
>
>
> I took a first cut at this yesterday, and was able to build something that looks similar to the release tarball. There's still some layout matching to do, but it's moved from 'can it be done?' to 'just needs doing'. I'll keep chipping away at it.
>
> ________________________________
> From: Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com>
> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 4:10:03 PM
> To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
>
>>> I thought we were moving to Maven at some point. Did that get sidelined?
>
> I think moving to maven is still the plan and there are definitely lots of
> interests on this - see ZOOKEEPER-1078
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__issues.apache.org_jira_browse_ZOOKEEPER-2D1078&d=DwIBaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=V07zLXy_E8PWbo7ELpwwaA&m=CozSBvJ5x8vQXVCw5b67P2tQzP0MGXNWo4zAbWK6FVw&s=MOwi2wW3chHqUd0SM75G4va57XxNJaJMABx14LYhYys&e= >
>
> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <jordan@jordanzimmerman.com
>> wrote:
>
>> I thought we were moving to Maven at some point. Did that get sidelined?
>>
>> -Jordan
>>
>>> On May 5, 2017, at 6:02 PM, Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Is this proposal intended to use BUCK to replace ant someday, or just add
>>> BUCK as an alternative build system? I thought it's not replacing ant,
>> but
>>> I want double check, because choosing a build system vs support multiple
>>> build system are different topics.
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Patrick White <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> My bad, I'll clarify.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Internally, we build and test with buck, but we don't worry about the
>>>> bin,conf,share,etc folders. So it's a thing that is possible (and I'll
>>>> certainly do it if there's interest) we just haven't put effort behind
>> it
>>>> because... well we don't use it that way.
>>>>
>>>> re: jenkins. uhhhh... I'll have to get back to you on that one. (never
>>>> used it, but I'll go download it and see what shakes loose)
>>>>
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: Camille Fournier <ca...@apache.org>
>>>> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 2:11:15 PM
>>>> To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
>>>>
>>>> Did you... Just list as a con that actually it currently won't work?
>>>>
>>>> Does it work on Jenkins?
>>>>
>>>>> On May 5, 2017 4:51 PM, "Patrick White" <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Howdy! I'm Patrick from the core systems team at Facebook, and I work
>> on
>>>>> ZooKeeper and ZooKeeper accessories all day long.
>>>>>
>>>>> Proposal: I want to add BUCK files to the zookeeper source tree.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hear me out:
>>>>>
>>>>> TL; DR - I want to hear everyone's thoughts and opinions on the matter.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> At Facebook, we use buck (buckbuild.com) to build everything. Buck
>> turns
>>>>> out to be a really nice build system. It's easy to set up and super
>>>> fast. I
>>>>> love buck.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ben put together some nice BUCK files that we use internally to build
>>>>> zookeeper and zkcli. Since we're already working to sync back with
>>>>> upstream, we'd love to get them in.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Pros:
>>>>>
>>>>> Buck files are a lot easier to work with than maven, ant, or anything
>>>> else
>>>>>
>>>>> Buck's fast
>>>>>
>>>>> These files do absolutely nothing for or against people who want to use
>>>>> maven or ant
>>>>>
>>>>> 'java_binary' generates a single executable file containing all the
>> jars
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cons:
>>>>>
>>>>> Not one of the "conventional" java build systems
>>>>>
>>>>> BUCK files laying around are just trash for people not interested in
>> them
>>>>>
>>>>> Doesn't currently generate the typical layout of bin, conf, share, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> - *currently*, it could probably be done
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Patrick
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Cheers
>>> Michael.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Michael.
Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
Posted by Patrick White <pw...@fb.com>.
To address some points from over the weekend:
>> I thought we were moving to Maven
Yep. Nothing needs to change, and this doesn't impede those plans at all.
>> Does it work on Jenkins?
Again, by no means an expert. I downloaded jenkins and set up a test project to build with buck. Seems to work?
>> Doesn't build a release-style tarball
I took a first cut at this yesterday, and was able to build something that looks similar to the release tarball. There's still some layout matching to do, but it's moved from 'can it be done?' to 'just needs doing'. I'll keep chipping away at it.
________________________________
From: Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com>
Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 4:10:03 PM
To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
Subject: Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
>> I thought we were moving to Maven at some point. Did that get sidelined?
I think moving to maven is still the plan and there are definitely lots of
interests on this - see ZOOKEEPER-1078
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__issues.apache.org_jira_browse_ZOOKEEPER-2D1078&d=DwIBaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=V07zLXy_E8PWbo7ELpwwaA&m=CozSBvJ5x8vQXVCw5b67P2tQzP0MGXNWo4zAbWK6FVw&s=MOwi2wW3chHqUd0SM75G4va57XxNJaJMABx14LYhYys&e= >
On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <jordan@jordanzimmerman.com
> wrote:
> I thought we were moving to Maven at some point. Did that get sidelined?
>
> -Jordan
>
> > On May 5, 2017, at 6:02 PM, Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> >
> > Is this proposal intended to use BUCK to replace ant someday, or just add
> > BUCK as an alternative build system? I thought it's not replacing ant,
> but
> > I want double check, because choosing a build system vs support multiple
> > build system are different topics.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Patrick White <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
> >
> >> My bad, I'll clarify.
> >>
> >>
> >> Internally, we build and test with buck, but we don't worry about the
> >> bin,conf,share,etc folders. So it's a thing that is possible (and I'll
> >> certainly do it if there's interest) we just haven't put effort behind
> it
> >> because... well we don't use it that way.
> >>
> >> re: jenkins. uhhhh... I'll have to get back to you on that one. (never
> >> used it, but I'll go download it and see what shakes loose)
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >> From: Camille Fournier <ca...@apache.org>
> >> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 2:11:15 PM
> >> To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
> >>
> >> Did you... Just list as a con that actually it currently won't work?
> >>
> >> Does it work on Jenkins?
> >>
> >> On May 5, 2017 4:51 PM, "Patrick White" <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Howdy! I'm Patrick from the core systems team at Facebook, and I work
> on
> >>> ZooKeeper and ZooKeeper accessories all day long.
> >>>
> >>> Proposal: I want to add BUCK files to the zookeeper source tree.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hear me out:
> >>>
> >>> TL; DR - I want to hear everyone's thoughts and opinions on the matter.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> At Facebook, we use buck (buckbuild.com) to build everything. Buck
> turns
> >>> out to be a really nice build system. It's easy to set up and super
> >> fast. I
> >>> love buck.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Ben put together some nice BUCK files that we use internally to build
> >>> zookeeper and zkcli. Since we're already working to sync back with
> >>> upstream, we'd love to get them in.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Pros:
> >>>
> >>> Buck files are a lot easier to work with than maven, ant, or anything
> >> else
> >>>
> >>> Buck's fast
> >>>
> >>> These files do absolutely nothing for or against people who want to use
> >>> maven or ant
> >>>
> >>> 'java_binary' generates a single executable file containing all the
> jars
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Cons:
> >>>
> >>> Not one of the "conventional" java build systems
> >>>
> >>> BUCK files laying around are just trash for people not interested in
> them
> >>>
> >>> Doesn't currently generate the typical layout of bin, conf, share, etc.
> >>>
> >>> - *currently*, it could probably be done
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Patrick
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cheers
> > Michael.
>
>
--
Cheers
Michael.
Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
Posted by Benjamin Reed <br...@apache.org>.
part of the reason we haven't moved to maven (this is supposition
since i have not been involved in the decision at all) is that it
doesn't buy that much over ant. both maven and ant are complex and
slow. the one thing maven has is the repository for dependencies.
i have been using buck for a while and i really like it. you can use
the maven repos without having to use maven. the gerritt devs are also
fans: http://gerrit-talks.commondatastorage.googleapis.com/buck-rant.html#1
it hasn't reached critical mass though, so i'm not sure we want to
move exclusively to buck, but having files there for people to try
could be useful.
ben
On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 4:10 PM, Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>> I thought we were moving to Maven at some point. Did that get sidelined?
>
> I think moving to maven is still the plan and there are definitely lots of
> interests on this - see ZOOKEEPER-1078
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1078>
>
> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <jordan@jordanzimmerman.com
>> wrote:
>
>> I thought we were moving to Maven at some point. Did that get sidelined?
>>
>> -Jordan
>>
>> > On May 5, 2017, at 6:02 PM, Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Is this proposal intended to use BUCK to replace ant someday, or just add
>> > BUCK as an alternative build system? I thought it's not replacing ant,
>> but
>> > I want double check, because choosing a build system vs support multiple
>> > build system are different topics.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Patrick White <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> My bad, I'll clarify.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Internally, we build and test with buck, but we don't worry about the
>> >> bin,conf,share,etc folders. So it's a thing that is possible (and I'll
>> >> certainly do it if there's interest) we just haven't put effort behind
>> it
>> >> because... well we don't use it that way.
>> >>
>> >> re: jenkins. uhhhh... I'll have to get back to you on that one. (never
>> >> used it, but I'll go download it and see what shakes loose)
>> >>
>> >> ________________________________
>> >> From: Camille Fournier <ca...@apache.org>
>> >> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 2:11:15 PM
>> >> To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
>> >> Subject: Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
>> >>
>> >> Did you... Just list as a con that actually it currently won't work?
>> >>
>> >> Does it work on Jenkins?
>> >>
>> >> On May 5, 2017 4:51 PM, "Patrick White" <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Howdy! I'm Patrick from the core systems team at Facebook, and I work
>> on
>> >>> ZooKeeper and ZooKeeper accessories all day long.
>> >>>
>> >>> Proposal: I want to add BUCK files to the zookeeper source tree.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Hear me out:
>> >>>
>> >>> TL; DR - I want to hear everyone's thoughts and opinions on the matter.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> At Facebook, we use buck (buckbuild.com) to build everything. Buck
>> turns
>> >>> out to be a really nice build system. It's easy to set up and super
>> >> fast. I
>> >>> love buck.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Ben put together some nice BUCK files that we use internally to build
>> >>> zookeeper and zkcli. Since we're already working to sync back with
>> >>> upstream, we'd love to get them in.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Pros:
>> >>>
>> >>> Buck files are a lot easier to work with than maven, ant, or anything
>> >> else
>> >>>
>> >>> Buck's fast
>> >>>
>> >>> These files do absolutely nothing for or against people who want to use
>> >>> maven or ant
>> >>>
>> >>> 'java_binary' generates a single executable file containing all the
>> jars
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Cons:
>> >>>
>> >>> Not one of the "conventional" java build systems
>> >>>
>> >>> BUCK files laying around are just trash for people not interested in
>> them
>> >>>
>> >>> Doesn't currently generate the typical layout of bin, conf, share, etc.
>> >>>
>> >>> - *currently*, it could probably be done
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>>
>> >>> Patrick
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Cheers
>> > Michael.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Michael.
Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
Posted by Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com>.
>> I thought we were moving to Maven at some point. Did that get sidelined?
I think moving to maven is still the plan and there are definitely lots of
interests on this - see ZOOKEEPER-1078
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1078>
On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 3:39 PM, Jordan Zimmerman <jordan@jordanzimmerman.com
> wrote:
> I thought we were moving to Maven at some point. Did that get sidelined?
>
> -Jordan
>
> > On May 5, 2017, at 6:02 PM, Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> >
> > Is this proposal intended to use BUCK to replace ant someday, or just add
> > BUCK as an alternative build system? I thought it's not replacing ant,
> but
> > I want double check, because choosing a build system vs support multiple
> > build system are different topics.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Patrick White <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
> >
> >> My bad, I'll clarify.
> >>
> >>
> >> Internally, we build and test with buck, but we don't worry about the
> >> bin,conf,share,etc folders. So it's a thing that is possible (and I'll
> >> certainly do it if there's interest) we just haven't put effort behind
> it
> >> because... well we don't use it that way.
> >>
> >> re: jenkins. uhhhh... I'll have to get back to you on that one. (never
> >> used it, but I'll go download it and see what shakes loose)
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >> From: Camille Fournier <ca...@apache.org>
> >> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 2:11:15 PM
> >> To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
> >>
> >> Did you... Just list as a con that actually it currently won't work?
> >>
> >> Does it work on Jenkins?
> >>
> >> On May 5, 2017 4:51 PM, "Patrick White" <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Howdy! I'm Patrick from the core systems team at Facebook, and I work
> on
> >>> ZooKeeper and ZooKeeper accessories all day long.
> >>>
> >>> Proposal: I want to add BUCK files to the zookeeper source tree.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hear me out:
> >>>
> >>> TL; DR - I want to hear everyone's thoughts and opinions on the matter.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> At Facebook, we use buck (buckbuild.com) to build everything. Buck
> turns
> >>> out to be a really nice build system. It's easy to set up and super
> >> fast. I
> >>> love buck.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Ben put together some nice BUCK files that we use internally to build
> >>> zookeeper and zkcli. Since we're already working to sync back with
> >>> upstream, we'd love to get them in.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Pros:
> >>>
> >>> Buck files are a lot easier to work with than maven, ant, or anything
> >> else
> >>>
> >>> Buck's fast
> >>>
> >>> These files do absolutely nothing for or against people who want to use
> >>> maven or ant
> >>>
> >>> 'java_binary' generates a single executable file containing all the
> jars
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Cons:
> >>>
> >>> Not one of the "conventional" java build systems
> >>>
> >>> BUCK files laying around are just trash for people not interested in
> them
> >>>
> >>> Doesn't currently generate the typical layout of bin, conf, share, etc.
> >>>
> >>> - *currently*, it could probably be done
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Patrick
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cheers
> > Michael.
>
>
--
Cheers
Michael.
Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
Posted by Jordan Zimmerman <jo...@jordanzimmerman.com>.
I thought we were moving to Maven at some point. Did that get sidelined?
-Jordan
> On May 5, 2017, at 6:02 PM, Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> Is this proposal intended to use BUCK to replace ant someday, or just add
> BUCK as an alternative build system? I thought it's not replacing ant, but
> I want double check, because choosing a build system vs support multiple
> build system are different topics.
>
>
> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Patrick White <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
>
>> My bad, I'll clarify.
>>
>>
>> Internally, we build and test with buck, but we don't worry about the
>> bin,conf,share,etc folders. So it's a thing that is possible (and I'll
>> certainly do it if there's interest) we just haven't put effort behind it
>> because... well we don't use it that way.
>>
>> re: jenkins. uhhhh... I'll have to get back to you on that one. (never
>> used it, but I'll go download it and see what shakes loose)
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Camille Fournier <ca...@apache.org>
>> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 2:11:15 PM
>> To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
>>
>> Did you... Just list as a con that actually it currently won't work?
>>
>> Does it work on Jenkins?
>>
>> On May 5, 2017 4:51 PM, "Patrick White" <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Howdy! I'm Patrick from the core systems team at Facebook, and I work on
>>> ZooKeeper and ZooKeeper accessories all day long.
>>>
>>> Proposal: I want to add BUCK files to the zookeeper source tree.
>>>
>>>
>>> Hear me out:
>>>
>>> TL; DR - I want to hear everyone's thoughts and opinions on the matter.
>>>
>>>
>>> At Facebook, we use buck (buckbuild.com) to build everything. Buck turns
>>> out to be a really nice build system. It's easy to set up and super
>> fast. I
>>> love buck.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ben put together some nice BUCK files that we use internally to build
>>> zookeeper and zkcli. Since we're already working to sync back with
>>> upstream, we'd love to get them in.
>>>
>>>
>>> Pros:
>>>
>>> Buck files are a lot easier to work with than maven, ant, or anything
>> else
>>>
>>> Buck's fast
>>>
>>> These files do absolutely nothing for or against people who want to use
>>> maven or ant
>>>
>>> 'java_binary' generates a single executable file containing all the jars
>>>
>>>
>>> Cons:
>>>
>>> Not one of the "conventional" java build systems
>>>
>>> BUCK files laying around are just trash for people not interested in them
>>>
>>> Doesn't currently generate the typical layout of bin, conf, share, etc.
>>>
>>> - *currently*, it could probably be done
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Patrick
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Michael.
Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
Posted by Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com>.
Sounds reasonable. I think we need decide how BUCK participate in various
workflows - for example does apache pre-build commit and daily build need
to build with BUCK (in addition to building with ant), or not. I assume
that's also why Camille mentioned Jenkins.
On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Patrick White <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
> My intent at this point is not to replace anything, just to add the
> ability to build with buck. Maintaining multiple build systems is a pain
> for sure, but I'd wager the majority of the burden of buck maintenance
> would fall on Facebook since we're the primary users of it to build
> zookeeper at this point.
>
> ________________________________
> From: Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com>
> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 3:02:51 PM
> To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
>
> Is this proposal intended to use BUCK to replace ant someday, or just add
> BUCK as an alternative build system? I thought it's not replacing ant, but
> I want double check, because choosing a build system vs support multiple
> build system are different topics.
>
>
> On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Patrick White <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
>
> > My bad, I'll clarify.
> >
> >
> > Internally, we build and test with buck, but we don't worry about the
> > bin,conf,share,etc folders. So it's a thing that is possible (and I'll
> > certainly do it if there's interest) we just haven't put effort behind it
> > because... well we don't use it that way.
> >
> > re: jenkins. uhhhh... I'll have to get back to you on that one. (never
> > used it, but I'll go download it and see what shakes loose)
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Camille Fournier <ca...@apache.org>
> > Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 2:11:15 PM
> > To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
> >
> > Did you... Just list as a con that actually it currently won't work?
> >
> > Does it work on Jenkins?
> >
> > On May 5, 2017 4:51 PM, "Patrick White" <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Howdy! I'm Patrick from the core systems team at Facebook, and I work
> on
> > > ZooKeeper and ZooKeeper accessories all day long.
> > >
> > > Proposal: I want to add BUCK files to the zookeeper source tree.
> > >
> > >
> > > Hear me out:
> > >
> > > TL; DR - I want to hear everyone's thoughts and opinions on the matter.
> > >
> > >
> > > At Facebook, we use buck (buckbuild.com) to build everything. Buck
> turns
> > > out to be a really nice build system. It's easy to set up and super
> > fast. I
> > > love buck.
> > >
> > >
> > > Ben put together some nice BUCK files that we use internally to build
> > > zookeeper and zkcli. Since we're already working to sync back with
> > > upstream, we'd love to get them in.
> > >
> > >
> > > Pros:
> > >
> > > Buck files are a lot easier to work with than maven, ant, or anything
> > else
> > >
> > > Buck's fast
> > >
> > > These files do absolutely nothing for or against people who want to use
> > > maven or ant
> > >
> > > 'java_binary' generates a single executable file containing all the
> jars
> > >
> > >
> > > Cons:
> > >
> > > Not one of the "conventional" java build systems
> > >
> > > BUCK files laying around are just trash for people not interested in
> them
> > >
> > > Doesn't currently generate the typical layout of bin, conf, share, etc.
> > >
> > > - *currently*, it could probably be done
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Patrick
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Michael.
>
--
Cheers
Michael.
Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
Posted by Patrick White <pw...@fb.com>.
My intent at this point is not to replace anything, just to add the ability to build with buck. Maintaining multiple build systems is a pain for sure, but I'd wager the majority of the burden of buck maintenance would fall on Facebook since we're the primary users of it to build zookeeper at this point.
________________________________
From: Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com>
Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 3:02:51 PM
To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
Subject: Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
Is this proposal intended to use BUCK to replace ant someday, or just add
BUCK as an alternative build system? I thought it's not replacing ant, but
I want double check, because choosing a build system vs support multiple
build system are different topics.
On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Patrick White <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
> My bad, I'll clarify.
>
>
> Internally, we build and test with buck, but we don't worry about the
> bin,conf,share,etc folders. So it's a thing that is possible (and I'll
> certainly do it if there's interest) we just haven't put effort behind it
> because... well we don't use it that way.
>
> re: jenkins. uhhhh... I'll have to get back to you on that one. (never
> used it, but I'll go download it and see what shakes loose)
>
> ________________________________
> From: Camille Fournier <ca...@apache.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 2:11:15 PM
> To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
>
> Did you... Just list as a con that actually it currently won't work?
>
> Does it work on Jenkins?
>
> On May 5, 2017 4:51 PM, "Patrick White" <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
>
> > Howdy! I'm Patrick from the core systems team at Facebook, and I work on
> > ZooKeeper and ZooKeeper accessories all day long.
> >
> > Proposal: I want to add BUCK files to the zookeeper source tree.
> >
> >
> > Hear me out:
> >
> > TL; DR - I want to hear everyone's thoughts and opinions on the matter.
> >
> >
> > At Facebook, we use buck (buckbuild.com) to build everything. Buck turns
> > out to be a really nice build system. It's easy to set up and super
> fast. I
> > love buck.
> >
> >
> > Ben put together some nice BUCK files that we use internally to build
> > zookeeper and zkcli. Since we're already working to sync back with
> > upstream, we'd love to get them in.
> >
> >
> > Pros:
> >
> > Buck files are a lot easier to work with than maven, ant, or anything
> else
> >
> > Buck's fast
> >
> > These files do absolutely nothing for or against people who want to use
> > maven or ant
> >
> > 'java_binary' generates a single executable file containing all the jars
> >
> >
> > Cons:
> >
> > Not one of the "conventional" java build systems
> >
> > BUCK files laying around are just trash for people not interested in them
> >
> > Doesn't currently generate the typical layout of bin, conf, share, etc.
> >
> > - *currently*, it could probably be done
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> >
>
--
Cheers
Michael.
Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
Posted by Michael Han <ha...@cloudera.com>.
Is this proposal intended to use BUCK to replace ant someday, or just add
BUCK as an alternative build system? I thought it's not replacing ant, but
I want double check, because choosing a build system vs support multiple
build system are different topics.
On Fri, May 5, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Patrick White <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
> My bad, I'll clarify.
>
>
> Internally, we build and test with buck, but we don't worry about the
> bin,conf,share,etc folders. So it's a thing that is possible (and I'll
> certainly do it if there's interest) we just haven't put effort behind it
> because... well we don't use it that way.
>
> re: jenkins. uhhhh... I'll have to get back to you on that one. (never
> used it, but I'll go download it and see what shakes loose)
>
> ________________________________
> From: Camille Fournier <ca...@apache.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 2:11:15 PM
> To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
>
> Did you... Just list as a con that actually it currently won't work?
>
> Does it work on Jenkins?
>
> On May 5, 2017 4:51 PM, "Patrick White" <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
>
> > Howdy! I'm Patrick from the core systems team at Facebook, and I work on
> > ZooKeeper and ZooKeeper accessories all day long.
> >
> > Proposal: I want to add BUCK files to the zookeeper source tree.
> >
> >
> > Hear me out:
> >
> > TL; DR - I want to hear everyone's thoughts and opinions on the matter.
> >
> >
> > At Facebook, we use buck (buckbuild.com) to build everything. Buck turns
> > out to be a really nice build system. It's easy to set up and super
> fast. I
> > love buck.
> >
> >
> > Ben put together some nice BUCK files that we use internally to build
> > zookeeper and zkcli. Since we're already working to sync back with
> > upstream, we'd love to get them in.
> >
> >
> > Pros:
> >
> > Buck files are a lot easier to work with than maven, ant, or anything
> else
> >
> > Buck's fast
> >
> > These files do absolutely nothing for or against people who want to use
> > maven or ant
> >
> > 'java_binary' generates a single executable file containing all the jars
> >
> >
> > Cons:
> >
> > Not one of the "conventional" java build systems
> >
> > BUCK files laying around are just trash for people not interested in them
> >
> > Doesn't currently generate the typical layout of bin, conf, share, etc.
> >
> > - *currently*, it could probably be done
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> >
>
--
Cheers
Michael.
Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
Posted by Patrick White <pw...@fb.com>.
My bad, I'll clarify.
Internally, we build and test with buck, but we don't worry about the bin,conf,share,etc folders. So it's a thing that is possible (and I'll certainly do it if there's interest) we just haven't put effort behind it because... well we don't use it that way.
re: jenkins. uhhhh... I'll have to get back to you on that one. (never used it, but I'll go download it and see what shakes loose)
________________________________
From: Camille Fournier <ca...@apache.org>
Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 2:11:15 PM
To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
Subject: Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
Did you... Just list as a con that actually it currently won't work?
Does it work on Jenkins?
On May 5, 2017 4:51 PM, "Patrick White" <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
> Howdy! I'm Patrick from the core systems team at Facebook, and I work on
> ZooKeeper and ZooKeeper accessories all day long.
>
> Proposal: I want to add BUCK files to the zookeeper source tree.
>
>
> Hear me out:
>
> TL; DR - I want to hear everyone's thoughts and opinions on the matter.
>
>
> At Facebook, we use buck (buckbuild.com) to build everything. Buck turns
> out to be a really nice build system. It's easy to set up and super fast. I
> love buck.
>
>
> Ben put together some nice BUCK files that we use internally to build
> zookeeper and zkcli. Since we're already working to sync back with
> upstream, we'd love to get them in.
>
>
> Pros:
>
> Buck files are a lot easier to work with than maven, ant, or anything else
>
> Buck's fast
>
> These files do absolutely nothing for or against people who want to use
> maven or ant
>
> 'java_binary' generates a single executable file containing all the jars
>
>
> Cons:
>
> Not one of the "conventional" java build systems
>
> BUCK files laying around are just trash for people not interested in them
>
> Doesn't currently generate the typical layout of bin, conf, share, etc.
>
> - *currently*, it could probably be done
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Patrick
>
>
Re: Ever considered using buck to build?
Posted by Camille Fournier <ca...@apache.org>.
Did you... Just list as a con that actually it currently won't work?
Does it work on Jenkins?
On May 5, 2017 4:51 PM, "Patrick White" <pw...@fb.com> wrote:
> Howdy! I'm Patrick from the core systems team at Facebook, and I work on
> ZooKeeper and ZooKeeper accessories all day long.
>
> Proposal: I want to add BUCK files to the zookeeper source tree.
>
>
> Hear me out:
>
> TL; DR - I want to hear everyone's thoughts and opinions on the matter.
>
>
> At Facebook, we use buck (buckbuild.com) to build everything. Buck turns
> out to be a really nice build system. It's easy to set up and super fast. I
> love buck.
>
>
> Ben put together some nice BUCK files that we use internally to build
> zookeeper and zkcli. Since we're already working to sync back with
> upstream, we'd love to get them in.
>
>
> Pros:
>
> Buck files are a lot easier to work with than maven, ant, or anything else
>
> Buck's fast
>
> These files do absolutely nothing for or against people who want to use
> maven or ant
>
> 'java_binary' generates a single executable file containing all the jars
>
>
> Cons:
>
> Not one of the "conventional" java build systems
>
> BUCK files laying around are just trash for people not interested in them
>
> Doesn't currently generate the typical layout of bin, conf, share, etc.
>
> - *currently*, it could probably be done
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Patrick
>
>