Hi Daniel,
On Mar 2, 2010, at 10:44 PM, Daniel Spiewak wrote:
http://www.engineyard.com/blog/2010/rake-and-ant-together-a-pick-it-n-stick-it-approach/
Charles Nutter pointed this out to me today. For those of you who
don't
have time to read the *entire* article, this is basically bi-
directional
integration between Ant and Rake. So, one direction is similar to
Antwrap,
except with a much nicer syntax.
It seems to me that the syntax is the same as Antwrap, except that it
uses an implicit target instead of an explicit one. Are there other
differences that I'm missing?
Did you see this post from Assaf last week? http://markmail.org/thread/2gsemh2dfz4fankk#query
:+page:1+mid:e365z5dolk3ey3aw+state:results
This might be something we could use to
replace Antwrap, which I never really cared for. The only hang-up
there is
we still need to support MRI, and I doubt this works on top of RJB.
The other direction allows Ant to use Rake tasks as if they were Ant
targets. I think this is huge for us. Since Buildr is based on
Rake, this
would mean that Ant builds could depend directly on Buildr tasks,
making it
possible to gradually migrate from an existing Ant build system to
one based
on Buildr. How 'bout them apples?
That is a neat implication and one I hadn't considered.
Rhett
