Mailing-List: contact users-help@buildr.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@buildr.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Subject: Re: buildr usability
From: Martin Grotzke <martin.grotzke@javakaffee.de>
To: users@buildr.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <4ADDB132.8050907@gmail.com>
References: <4ADDB132.8050907@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1";
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-8HpUs4dwxtxTMjXfueYF"
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 15:26:18 +0200
Message-Id: <1256045181.6314.96.camel@localhost.localdomain.tld>
Mime-Version: 1.0

--=-8HpUs4dwxtxTMjXfueYF
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

+1, when we introduced buildr in one of our projects we had the similar
kind of issues.

Cheers,
Martin


On Tue, 2009-10-20 at 14:46 +0200, Ittay Dror wrote:
> Hi,
>=20
>=20
> Regarding the next buildr version, I think the biggest issue should be
> being able to quickly start using buildr.
>=20
>=20
> 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.
>=20
>=20
> 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.
>=20
>=20
> 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...
>=20
>=20
> 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 (!)
>=20
>=20
> 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.
>=20
>=20
> What it boils down to is bad first impression with BuildR.
>=20
> 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...").
>=20
> Regards,
> Ittay
>=20
> P.s., I can try to accomplish this if the idea sounds good.
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20

--=-8HpUs4dwxtxTMjXfueYF
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEABECAAYFAkrdunQACgkQ7FvOl7Te+pYG4QCgghiC5tWOrbGrkOvcWI2i+K3p
GUcAn1k5LwRCSkaFDBIOoLYJlfFVndeo
=zXpj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-8HpUs4dwxtxTMjXfueYF--