Fully agree, reinventing the wheel is not a good time investment. Ant has been there for years, why not reuse it ? Why reinvent Ant (or Maven) in Clojure ? The fact that they may look ugly and cumbersome to use has to be separated from the benefits they provide.
We switched to Leiningen here and created an internal Maven repository with Archiva for our own components. Leiningen implements in Clojure a simplified build interface, this is where the niceties are for users. It take cares of the house keeping for you and this is where we want a tool to save us time. Aside from resolving our dependencies in Maven repositories on the net and loading a few unknowns to our internal repository, we did not have anything else to do build wise. We have around 100 dependencies here and were looking for a way to simplify this management. Leiningen does it. If Ant or Maven changes, most of these impacts will most probably be hidden in Leiningen. We could not care less about the internal details... that's not where we see the added value of a build/deployment tool, it's in the day to day use by "normal" developers (non-Maven/Ant experts). Leiningen can handle simple projects as well as complex ones, why create yet another tool/tool-set ? For the sake of having it written 100% in Clojure ? Efforts should be focused on improving Leiningen when needed, not on creating another gizmo. As for the "obsessive" desire to get an integrated build/deployment tool, picture this, we need to manage all the above dependencies plus our own components AND multiple costumer site configurations. Having some simple automation here is an absolute requirement. We will add a deployment plugin to Leiningen this year to manage our deployments at customer sites. A Rails/Ruby one is also on the table. I do not call this hilarious (or obsessive), it's called common sense. Humans could still be reinventing fire every century but there's no added value to this process. Luc P. On Fri, 2010-03-26 at 16:49 +1030, Antony Blakey wrote: > On 26/03/2010, at 4:37 PM, Rayne wrote: > > > I don't think I've ever seen a language in which part of the community > > shunned build tools written in the language itself. It's quite > > hilarious. > > I've seen many examples where an overwhelming Not-Invented-Here attitude lead > to failure. > > Antony Blakey > -------------------------- > CTO, Linkuistics Pty Ltd > Ph: 0438 840 787 > > Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe > that there are fairies at the bottom of it too? > -- Douglas Adams > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words "REMOVE ME" as the subject.
