Home » Eclipse Projects » Buckminster dev » iX CeBIT Forum 2010 Talk
| iX CeBIT Forum 2010 Talk [message #506644] |
Fri, 08 January 2010 13:35  |
 Carsten Reckord
Messages: 139
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi,
iX, a popular German IT magazine, organizes an annual forum on the CeBIT. This year one focus is on experience reports for agile software
development processes.
I was asked to submit a talk on our (obviously positive :)) experience with setting up a Continuous Integration server with Buckminster and
the Hudson plug-in. Without having prepared the talk yet, the idea is to present an introduction of Buckminster and the Hudson plug-in
followed by (or mixed in with) our lessons learned and some best practices and maybe finishing with a brief overview of some more advanced
topics like coverage, obfuscation or "Composing for Updatability" your product the Buckminster way.
I'd like to ask if, from your experience with other talks so far, there are any typical questions that keep coming up or typically difficult
points or misconceptions that should be cleared preemptively? And if you have any other suggestions or comments, of course feel free to fire
away, too.
Best regards,
Carsten
|
|
|
| Re: iX CeBIT Forum 2010 Talk [message #506678 is a reply to message #506644] |
Fri, 08 January 2010 12:06  |
Henrik Lindberg
Messages: 2509
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi,
Sounds great. If you need any slides, let me know and I can email you
the powerpoint slides from ESE for instance, or if you want
illustrations from the Buckminster book.
On the topic of questions and possible confusions...
....some have a hard time with the fact that the headeless build is the
same as the IDE build, and think that using "the IDE when building
headlessly" is a huge overhead. They do not seem to get their head
around the fact that is just a bunch of bundles that just happens to be
used in headless fashion or inside an IDE. Somehow they think that "IDE
bits" are heavier to use than "non IDE bits" :)
A piece of general advice...
.... try to stay high level, there are many concepts in Buckminster -
lots of terms etc. at it is easy to overwhelm the audience by explaining
too much too early (heads tend to explode :) - hence the very simple
summary slides in the beginning of our Buckminster presentation - even
if things get more complicated later, the simple images and ideas from
the start of the presentation hopefully sticks to people's minds.
Regards
- henrik
On 1/8/10 2:35 PM, Carsten Reckord wrote:
> Hi,
>
> iX, a popular German IT magazine, organizes an annual forum on the
> CeBIT. This year one focus is on experience reports for agile software
> development processes.
>
> I was asked to submit a talk on our (obviously positive :)) experience
> with setting up a Continuous Integration server with Buckminster and the
> Hudson plug-in. Without having prepared the talk yet, the idea is to
> present an introduction of Buckminster and the Hudson plug-in followed
> by (or mixed in with) our lessons learned and some best practices and
> maybe finishing with a brief overview of some more advanced topics like
> coverage, obfuscation or "Composing for Updatability" your product the
> Buckminster way.
>
> I'd like to ask if, from your experience with other talks so far, there
> are any typical questions that keep coming up or typically difficult
> points or misconceptions that should be cleared preemptively? And if you
> have any other suggestions or comments, of course feel free to fire
> away, too.
>
> Best regards,
> Carsten
|
|
|
| Re: iX CeBIT Forum 2010 Talk [message #506682 is a reply to message #506644] |
Fri, 08 January 2010 12:44 |
|
Hi Carsten,
The question that always pops up is "How does this compare with Maven?".
The short answer is that Buckminster builds your workspace using Eclipse builders, i.e. exactly the same as when you
work with your IDE. All compiler settings apply. Internal builders will execute etc. This is because Buckminster is
built on top of the Eclipse internal build system.
Maven is an external build system with a plug-in framework of its own. It cannot work directly with the eclipse bundles
for team sharing, compilers, PDE build, p2, etc. Maven builds 'the maven way' and is not in any way dependent on Eclipse
technology. This is an advantage if the code is maintained using other IDE's then Eclipse. Several projects provide
bundles that enables Maven functionality in the Eclipse IDE.
Buckminster can call on maven and has built in support for transitive dependency resolution from maven repositories. We
would like to do more with Maven and we have had a couple of Maven people as committers on the project. But at the end,
intellectual property issues (Maven is not IP approved by the Eclipse EMO) and different main objectives made it hard
for them to contribute.
Another question that might pop up is now Buckminster relate to b3. b3 is more model centric then Buckminster. It
convergers all aspects of the build into one single model. The textual representation of that model is based on xText
and much nicer then XML. We foresee that b3 will replace both Buckminster and PDE build eventually. A smooth migration
path will be provided.
Other then that, people usually ask where they can find documentation and examples. How to build RCP applications for
instance.
Good luck!
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
On 2010-01-08 14:35, Carsten Reckord wrote:
> Hi,
>
> iX, a popular German IT magazine, organizes an annual forum on the
> CeBIT. This year one focus is on experience reports for agile software
> development processes.
>
> I was asked to submit a talk on our (obviously positive :)) experience
> with setting up a Continuous Integration server with Buckminster and the
> Hudson plug-in. Without having prepared the talk yet, the idea is to
> present an introduction of Buckminster and the Hudson plug-in followed
> by (or mixed in with) our lessons learned and some best practices and
> maybe finishing with a brief overview of some more advanced topics like
> coverage, obfuscation or "Composing for Updatability" your product the
> Buckminster way.
>
> I'd like to ask if, from your experience with other talks so far, there
> are any typical questions that keep coming up or typically difficult
> points or misconceptions that should be cleared preemptively? And if you
> have any other suggestions or comments, of course feel free to fire
> away, too.
>
> Best regards,
> Carsten
|
|
|
| Re: iX CeBIT Forum 2010 Talk [message #507546 is a reply to message #506682] |
Wed, 13 January 2010 14:40 |
Carsten Reckord
Messages: 139
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Thomas,
Thank you. Comments below.
On 08.01.2010 18:38, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> Hi Carsten,
> The question that always pops up is "How does this compare with Maven?".
>
> The short answer is that Buckminster builds your workspace using Eclipse builders, i.e. exactly the same as when you
> work with your IDE. All compiler settings apply. Internal builders will execute etc. This is because Buckminster is
> built on top of the Eclipse internal build system.
>
> Maven is an external build system with a plug-in framework of its own. It cannot work directly with the eclipse bundles
> for team sharing, compilers, PDE build, p2, etc. Maven builds 'the maven way' and is not in any way dependent on Eclipse
> technology. This is an advantage if the code is maintained using other IDE's then Eclipse. Several projects provide
> bundles that enables Maven functionality in the Eclipse IDE.
Oops, I probably should have mentioned that I was already planning on doing a quick Buckminster/Maven comparison. Couldn't have said it
better though... :)
> Buckminster can call on maven and has built in support for transitive dependency resolution from maven repositories. We
> would like to do more with Maven and we have had a couple of Maven people as committers on the project. But at the end,
> intellectual property issues (Maven is not IP approved by the Eclipse EMO) and different main objectives made it hard
> for them to contribute.
So I guess the IAM project is still stuck in the IP approval process? Wasn't one of their original ideas when moving from q4e to IAM to
use/integrate with Buckminster for all dependency resolution issues? Currently the Wiki only talks about source code materialization
(http://wiki.eclipse.org/IAM_Buckminster_Integration).
> Another question that might pop up is now Buckminster relate to b3. b3 is more model centric then Buckminster. It
> convergers all aspects of the build into one single model. The textual representation of that model is based on xText
> and much nicer then XML. We foresee that b3 will replace both Buckminster and PDE build eventually. A smooth migration
> path will be provided.
I've seen the talk submission to EclipseCon'10. Out of personal interest, is there more information available on b3 already?
> Other then that, people usually ask where they can find documentation and examples. How to build RCP applications for
> instance.
I was planning on referencing the Wiki as a starting point and of course the Bucky Book and Johannes' Bucky+Hudson tutorial. Any more
noteworthy documentation I should mention?
> Good luck!
Thank you :)
Best regards,
Carsten
|
|
|
| Re: iX CeBIT Forum 2010 Talk [message #507547 is a reply to message #506678] |
Wed, 13 January 2010 14:40 |
Carsten Reckord
Messages: 139
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Henrik,
On 08.01.2010 17:55, Henrik Lindberg wrote:
> Hi,
> Sounds great. If you need any slides, let me know and I can email you
> the powerpoint slides from ESE for instance, or if you want
> illustrations from the Buckminster book.
Great, thanks. I didn't make it to ESE, but I really liked your EclipseCon'09 talk and some overview illustrations from there would be
really appreciated. It's still a bit until I get notification if my talk is accepted (start of February), but I think I'll go ahead and
start preparing the talk now anyway and subject our JUG to it beforehand.
> On the topic of questions and possible confusions...
> ...some have a hard time with the fact that the headeless build is the
> same as the IDE build, and think that using "the IDE when building
> headlessly" is a huge overhead. They do not seem to get their head
> around the fact that is just a bunch of bundles that just happens to be
> used in headless fashion or inside an IDE. Somehow they think that "IDE
> bits" are heavier to use than "non IDE bits" :)
Ah, interesting :) I'll try to make that clear...
> A piece of general advice...
> ... try to stay high level, there are many concepts in Buckminster -
> lots of terms etc. at it is easy to overwhelm the audience by explaining
> too much too early (heads tend to explode :) - hence the very simple
> summary slides in the beginning of our Buckminster presentation - even
> if things get more complicated later, the simple images and ideas from
> the start of the presentation hopefully sticks to people's minds.
That's good advice, thanks. I'll probably only be able to give a high-level introduction anyway and then get to some details in the
experience report part since I only have 20-25 minutes :(
Best regards,
Carsten
|
|
| | |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu Apr 18 16:16:57 GMT 2024
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.02234 seconds |
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
