[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [dash-dev] Re: [buckminster-dev] There must be 50 ways to build your project... or leave your lover (was Re: Moving GEF to Athena (was Re: [gef-dev] Re: Last build on emft.eclipse.org today))
|
Nick and Thomas,
Thanks so much for the answers / clarifications. I originally wondered about these things on GEF mailing list when trying to understanding all the issues related to building GEF.
I am going to start a wiki page, and then likely a blog post, to try and present all this information (unless it already exists). I'm sure I'm not the only one who is interested in Eclipse Build and wondered about all the different technologies.
It would be good to create some sort of VEN diagram (or compatibility matrix) that shows the overlap between technologies (which technologies provide alternatives to one another) and how the different technologies complement each other. In light of the b3 proposal, it seems like a good time to reflect on what we have.
Thanks again,
Ian
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:57 PM, Thomas Hallgren
<thomas@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi all,
Here are some clarifications on Buckminster related things.
Nick Boldt wrote:
Athena + Hudson gives you:
* build-to-build interaction (build B can start if it sees there's a new build A available) so you can get build cascades (eg., perfect for the projects that depend on GMF)
* EMMA, FindBugs and other source/performance analysis tools
* Simple interface for having builds respond to changes in CVS/SVN and build automatically (continuous integration)
* better web UI than the custom stuff in build/index.php, which is nightmarish to update every time someone needs a new requirement added
* XML and plain text APIs to track what's happening w/ builds, including being able to watch build status on iPod (David Green's Hudson Helper)
* plots showing how your junits are increasing/decreasing over time
* plots showing how long your build takes over time
* the Continuous Integration Game, to encourage people to write more tests, fix more warnings, NOT break the build, etc.
* ability to build against p2 repos, extracting specific feature.groups needed for compilation
Is the idea to move all the modeling builds to this new method? Or is there good reasons to keep people using the existing infrastructure?
The Modeling build is deprecated, just as the EMFT build was deprecated before that. It's been in maintenance mode since I started Athena last June. So, yes, if you want new bells/whistles in the system, it's Athena or bust.
Buckminster,
Workspace & target platform provisioning (?)
Yes, and in addition to that, Buckminster brings you out-of-the-box commands to:
* Build and export bundles and features. Either from your IDE or from the command line. The build that executes will be exactly the same in both cases
* Create a P2 site from any feature. This includes pack200 and signing. Can run on any server (or from your IDE)
* Hudson integration (sharing a lot of the advantages that Nick mentioned for Athena above)
* And lots more. Take a look at our documentation: http://www.eclipse.org/downloads/download.php?file=/tools/buckminster/doc/BuckyBook.pdf
bucky build,
Uses Buckminster to create an aggregate p2 repo (Galileo)
The Galileo Builder is described here:
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Buckminster_Galileo_Builder
And we're working on it's successor:
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Getting_Started_With_Aggregator_(Buckminster)
gan-o-matic,
Last year's Ganymede builder, which was either ant or buckminster, or a combination (not sure)
It was a mix of Ant, Buckminster, and the old Update Manager. May it rest in peace :-)
Kind Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
--
R. Ian Bull | EclipseSource Victoria | +1 250 477 7484
http://eclipsesource.com |
http://twitter.com/eclipsesource
