continuum-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ray Tsang" <>
Subject Re: Blog entry
Date Thu, 20 Apr 2006 01:35:12 GMT
I think it's too late to debate the existance of continuum.  I can
probably understand why this new project was started.  In fact,
despite my agreement w/ the blog and a few quirks I experienced
myself, I still deployed continuum here at work.

I think the important thing for continuum now is to continue to
improve and catch up w/ some great-to-have features.  The least I want
is to have it fade away like Scarab....


On 4/20/06, Barrie Treloar <> wrote:
> On 4/20/06, Rinku <> wrote:
> >
> > By that logic - just one development language/platform should be enough
> > for all s/w development, why re-invent and invest in other
> > languages/platforms??
> >
> > I don't suppose there's anything stopping anyone from raising feature
> > requests for Cruisecontrol on cruisecontrol lists. Questioning
> > Continuum's existence IMHO is just silly.
> It is not silly. CruiseControl is an open source project, you can take
> that project and add additional features to it and no one can stop
> you.
> Continuum would have benefited from an existing architecture, with an
> existing user base, to extend that platform to support Maven2.  And
> this would have removed the need to re-invent the plumbing of a
> continuous integration system.
> I'm not questioning the new features of Continuum, as people believe
> they are of value, I am questioning the need to re-invent the plumbing
> part.
View raw message