> > <project name="Cocoon">
> > <target name="main">
> > <mkdir dir="build"/>
> > <javac srcdir="src" destdir="build"/>
> > <jar jarfile="cocoon.jar" basedir="build" items="org/apache/cocoon"/>
> > </target>
> > <target name="clean">
> > <deltree dir="build"/>
> > </target>
> > </project>
>
> > now, please, tell me: would any make be _this_ simple? ;)
>
> Yes.
>
> SRC=*.java
> DEST=cocoon.jar
>
> OBJ=${SRC:.java=.class}
>
> .class.java:
> $(JAVA) $(JAVA_FLAGS) $<
>
> $(DEST): $(OBJ)
> $(JAR) $(JAR_FLAGS) $(OBJ)
>
> clean:
> rm -f $(OBJ) $(DEST)
>
> or there about (usual not-tested disclaimer ;-)...
>
Being biased towards the XML way, can the make project be validated like the
XML can against a DTD. That _should_ get rid of a _lot_ of bugs right off
the bat.
> 1. if we use make; we cause the casual window's developers to
> have to install some free or commercial tools. Any developer
> more experienced, either on windows, mac or unix will already
> have done so. And they can either use their commercial tool
> or use make, which they propably have. The beginners will have to
> fetch make; at the cost of a download and learn it. But there are
> O'Reilly books for this :-) If ness. you could generate dos BATCH
> files from the make's.
>
> 2. If we use 'ant'; we have to a) get an Ant project underway to
> make sure it meet all our needs. b) get the more experienced
> developers to take out time to learn use it, and c) the same
> of the newer developers.
>
> So with '1.' I see a beginner hurdle, a one off investment for a small
> part of the developer population (but still a valuable part!) and with
> '2.' we have to get _every_ devleoper to take a hit _and_ we have to get
> Ant further developed. Taking a further hit on the mind real estate.
>
> That, in short, causes me to prefer '1' - pure make (not even GNU make,
> but the most old/primitive version of it all...).
This is the reason that COBOL still exists in the world. "There is a lot of
invested knowledge, so we can't give it up." I agree that Ant cannot do as
much as make can, but for pure java projects, a pure java tool, lowers
almost every barrier there is, and isn't that what you want, so that many
more 'casual developers' can get a hold of and use the technology, moving
open source even further along. My 2 cents.
Scott
