Hi,

El mié., 18 mar. 2020 a las 17:17, Alex Harui (<[email protected]>)
escribió:

> IMO we still need to run Ant at some point, so why not use Ant for
> scripting?  That's what it is meant for.
>

Our perception is that trying to force 2 builds (three, four or more if we
add new build systems in the future) to the *release* (not talking about
*building* here) is what makes the whole process not reliable.

That's the point. Instead, if we just focus on just one, could be ANT,
Maven (**) or any other new one, and then ensure the other(s) still work
and are checked post release, makes remove all the old problems and make
the process much more reliable. I think that's a fact and something that we
can foresee for sure.

(**) we propose Maven for this (just release) and not (Ant), since is the
most used for releasing and CI due to numbers [1], and hence the most
prepared for the task and the one that should allow us to be updated in the
future without much hassle or breaking things.

[1] https://twitter.com/ChristoferDutz/status/1240219399551934473

-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Reply via email to