[CMake] Re: Raven, Antwrap, Buildr

[Brandon Van Every]

On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 7:29 PM, Brandon Van Every <bvanevery at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  http://www.onjava.com/pub/a/onjava/2007/12/05/introducing-raven-an-elegant-build-for-java.html

The comments following this article are interesting.  For instance, on syntax:

"This is just stupid. The Ruby syntax is horrendous. I'd rather use
Groovy than Ruby if I was ever going to use a scripting language. I've
never been stuck using Ant either, it does everything I need."

"I've just having a look to Raven and Buildr, Raven seems to be a
little bit hard to read for a Raven /Ruby noob (too many think like <<
[{' not very undestable when who want to quicly know : "what this
project produced, on what it depends on ...)."

Sound familiar?  Earlier I mused that moving CMake to Ruby would be
more strategic than Lua, if it were only about language sales.
Probably premature!  I do recall that Python vs. Ruby is a big split
as far as language taste and philosophy.

"What do I have to install to run Ant or Maven vs what do I have to
install to use Raven?"  - Same old same old about people being too
lazy to download stuff.

Maven tries to manage the build strategy and lifecycle for you.  This
leads to the problem of the tool trying to be too clever:

"About Maven major drawback, you have often to rethink your process
(deploy,deliver)... because these are not suited to Maven Plugins.
You can create our own but you have to maintain it and I think, this
is bug-prone as Ant..."


Cheers,
Brandon Van Every