gump-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Bodewig <>
Subject Re: [RT] Moving gump forward
Date Tue, 09 Mar 2004 10:27:13 GMT
On Mon, 8 Mar 2004, Adam R. B. Jack <> wrote:

> I'd like Stefan's input on if we allowed a <gump to be like
> <ant|<maven -- to have Gump just build/archive.

It won't work, at least not without duplicating larger parts of the
build file in the gump descriptor.

Gump currently doesn't know where the sources are, some project
definitions compile from more than one source directory.

Many builds contain conditional compilations (like Ant's starteam
tasks will never get compiled in Gump since the - non-public -
starteam SDK is not available).

Many projects produce multiple jars, Gump doesn't know what to put

If we make all the necessary information available to Gump the
descriptor will become as complex as a minimal Ant build file to do
the same thing.  People simply won't take the effort to create it, and
why should they when all the information they have to provide already
is available from the build files/project descriptors/whatever.

> We'd loose the ant regression test suite.

Don't restrict it to "my" (it isn't mine, BTW ;-) Ant regressions
suite.  The same would apply to Maven or NAnt or GNU make or ...

> BTW: I suspect that <gump could implemented by writting the ant
> script on the fly w/o us having to reinvent the wheel.

See the antgump proposal in Alexandria - maybe Scott can chime in


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message