rails-devel

[Rails-devel] New build process and installer for Rails 2.0?

[Stefan F. <ste...@we...>]

There was something I did not remember was still to be done before I 
will release an alpha:

I intend to update the build process and suggest for this using gradle 
(http://www.gradle.org).

I compared this to adding apache ivy (http://ant.apache.org/ivy/) and 
stay with the previous ant/eclipse-build.

My strong feeling is that I prefer to make the move to the 
next-generation build tool. Using xml seemed as weird for a build as 
writing Makefiles. And it seems much less restrictive than maven is/was.

I still want to hear if there are any objections, even if it will only 
effect myself as I will be responsible for the rails2.0 build.

The other issue is to use installer to create packages for the different 
operating systems.

Unfortunately I have not found any reasonable non-commercial tool for 
this task. However there are two installer products that provide free 
licenses to OS systems:

Install4j: Requires a link to their page

http://www.ej-technologies.com/buy/install4j/openSource/enter

Installbuilder: No such requirement

http://installbuilder.bitrock.com/open-source-licenses.html?ModPagespeed=noscript

Does anyone of you have an objection or recommendation? If I do hear 
nothing negative I would apply for a free license for Rails for both 
products.

Re: [Rails-devel] New build process and installer for Rails 2.0?

[brett l. <bre...@gm...>]

On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 7:45 AM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...> wrote:

> There was something I did not remember was still to be done before I
> will release an alpha:
>
> I intend to update the build process and suggest for this using gradle
> (http://www.gradle.org).
>
> I compared this to adding apache ivy (http://ant.apache.org/ivy/) and
> stay with the previous ant/eclipse-build.
>
> My strong feeling is that I prefer to make the move to the
> next-generation build tool. Using xml seemed as weird for a build as
> writing Makefiles. And it seems much less restrictive than maven is/was.
>
>
The biggest question I have is... why?

What will changing build tools enable us to do that we can't with the
existing tools?



> I still want to hear if there are any objections, even if it will only
> effect myself as I will be responsible for the rails2.0 build.
>
> The other issue is to use installer to create packages for the different
> operating systems.
>
>

Again... why?

What benefit does this give us over the current distribution method?



> Unfortunately I have not found any reasonable non-commercial tool for
> this task. However there are two installer products that provide free
> licenses to OS systems:
>
> Install4j: Requires a link to their page
>
> http://www.ej-technologies.com/buy/install4j/openSource/enter
>
> Installbuilder: No such requirement
>
>
> http://installbuilder.bitrock.com/open-source-licenses.html?ModPagespeed=noscript
>
> Does anyone of you have an objection or recommendation? If I do hear
> nothing negative I would apply for a free license for Rails for both
> products.
>
>
>
I'm not immediately opposed to either idea, provided that there's a good
reason to spend the time on that instead of implementing other desirable
features.

---Brett.

Re: [Rails-devel] New build process and installer for Rails 2.0?

[Phil D. <de...@gm...>]

As far as the build process goes - I have minimal idea on how the
current tool works.

As far as installer goes, is this necessary?  Currently just download,
extract and run the .jar works nicely (at least for me, maybe there
are people out there who struggle with that?)

On 5 February 2014 12:45, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...> wrote:
> There was something I did not remember was still to be done before I
> will release an alpha:
>
> I intend to update the build process and suggest for this using gradle
> (http://www.gradle.org).
>
> I compared this to adding apache ivy (http://ant.apache.org/ivy/) and
> stay with the previous ant/eclipse-build.
>
> My strong feeling is that I prefer to make the move to the
> next-generation build tool. Using xml seemed as weird for a build as
> writing Makefiles. And it seems much less restrictive than maven is/was.
>
> I still want to hear if there are any objections, even if it will only
> effect myself as I will be responsible for the rails2.0 build.
>
> The other issue is to use installer to create packages for the different
> operating systems.
>
> Unfortunately I have not found any reasonable non-commercial tool for
> this task. However there are two installer products that provide free
> licenses to OS systems:
>
> Install4j: Requires a link to their page
>
> http://www.ej-technologies.com/buy/install4j/openSource/enter
>
> Installbuilder: No such requirement
>
> http://installbuilder.bitrock.com/open-source-licenses.html?ModPagespeed=noscript
>
> Does anyone of you have an objection or recommendation? If I do hear
> nothing negative I would apply for a free license for Rails for both
> products.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Managing the Performance of Cloud-Based Applications
> Take advantage of what the Cloud has to offer - Avoid Common Pitfalls.
> Read the Whitepaper.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=121051231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel

Re: [Rails-devel] New build process and installer for Rails 2.0?

[Stefan F. <ste...@we...>]

You are right I did not tell you why exactly.

I hope at least some of the arguments are convincing enough...
Stefan

A) Build tool:
All build tools on the market will allow us to get things done. The main 
improvements are functionality and ease of use.

Duplication of definitions in the current build.xml and rails_build.xml 
files and the

I started working on smaller scale fun projects using either for Android 
or using one of the recent JVM languages like Scala and Groovy.

And for all of those there is gradle a possible solution.

Compared to ant I believe gradle is better documented, provides more 
features and is easier to use.

And I have more experience with gradle compared to ant. And I do not 
think that there is anyone with a lot of Ant programming on Rails now.

My choice of gradle is mostly due to the ease of use. The second reason 
is the improved functionality (e.g. easier to integrate with Eclipse and 
other IDEs and for dependency management).

B) Installer
Here it is mostly to be able to try and test new features.

See for example:

http://installbuilder.bitrock.com/installbuilder-features.html

http://www.ej-technologies.com/products/install4j/features.html

Some features might be desktop integration (icons, file assoc), 
automatic JRE update, creation of resource bundles to make allow quicker 
updates etc.

However it is not as important as a new build tool.




On 02/05/2014 03:29 PM, brett lentz wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 7:45 AM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...
> <mailto:ste...@we...>> wrote:
>
>     There was something I did not remember was still to be done before I
>     will release an alpha:
>
>     I intend to update the build process and suggest for this using gradle
>     (http://www.gradle.org).
>
>     I compared this to adding apache ivy (http://ant.apache.org/ivy/) and
>     stay with the previous ant/eclipse-build.
>
>     My strong feeling is that I prefer to make the move to the
>     next-generation build tool. Using xml seemed as weird for a build as
>     writing Makefiles. And it seems much less restrictive than maven is/was.
>
>
> The biggest question I have is... why?
>
> What will changing build tools enable us to do that we can't with the
> existing tools?
>
>     I still want to hear if there are any objections, even if it will only
>     effect myself as I will be responsible for the rails2.0 build.
>
>     The other issue is to use installer to create packages for the different
>     operating systems.
>
>
>
> Again... why?
>
> What benefit does this give us over the current distribution method?
>
>     Unfortunately I have not found any reasonable non-commercial tool for
>     this task. However there are two installer products that provide free
>     licenses to OS systems:
>
>     Install4j: Requires a link to their page
>
>     http://www.ej-technologies.com/buy/install4j/openSource/enter
>
>     Installbuilder: No such requirement
>
>     http://installbuilder.bitrock.com/open-source-licenses.html?ModPagespeed=noscript
>
>     Does anyone of you have an objection or recommendation? If I do hear
>     nothing negative I would apply for a free license for Rails for both
>     products.
>
>
>
> I'm not immediately opposed to either idea, provided that there's a good
> reason to spend the time on that instead of implementing other desirable
> features.
>
> ---Brett.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Managing the Performance of Cloud-Based Applications
> Take advantage of what the Cloud has to offer - Avoid Common Pitfalls.
> Read the Whitepaper.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=121051231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>

Re: [Rails-devel] New build process and installer for Rails 2.0?

[brett l. <bre...@gm...>]

Being familiar with the tools is a good plus. So, I'm fine with Gradle,
especially if you've got good experience.

The installer seems of limited utility right now. My suggestion would be to
shelve that for a little while. It might be more important later on,
especially if we get to things like network play or integrating with a web
service or something.

---Brett.


---Brett.


On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...> wrote:

> You are right I did not tell you why exactly.
>
> I hope at least some of the arguments are convincing enough...
> Stefan
>
> A) Build tool:
> All build tools on the market will allow us to get things done. The main
> improvements are functionality and ease of use.
>
> Duplication of definitions in the current build.xml and rails_build.xml
> files and the
>
> I started working on smaller scale fun projects using either for Android
> or using one of the recent JVM languages like Scala and Groovy.
>
> And for all of those there is gradle a possible solution.
>
> Compared to ant I believe gradle is better documented, provides more
> features and is easier to use.
>
> And I have more experience with gradle compared to ant. And I do not
> think that there is anyone with a lot of Ant programming on Rails now.
>
> My choice of gradle is mostly due to the ease of use. The second reason
> is the improved functionality (e.g. easier to integrate with Eclipse and
> other IDEs and for dependency management).
>
> B) Installer
> Here it is mostly to be able to try and test new features.
>
> See for example:
>
> http://installbuilder.bitrock.com/installbuilder-features.html
>
> http://www.ej-technologies.com/products/install4j/features.html
>
> Some features might be desktop integration (icons, file assoc),
> automatic JRE update, creation of resource bundles to make allow quicker
> updates etc.
>
> However it is not as important as a new build tool.
>
>
>
>
> On 02/05/2014 03:29 PM, brett lentz wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 7:45 AM, Stefan Frey <ste...@we...
> > <mailto:ste...@we...>> wrote:
> >
> >     There was something I did not remember was still to be done before I
> >     will release an alpha:
> >
> >     I intend to update the build process and suggest for this using
> gradle
> >     (http://www.gradle.org).
> >
> >     I compared this to adding apache ivy (http://ant.apache.org/ivy/)
> and
> >     stay with the previous ant/eclipse-build.
> >
> >     My strong feeling is that I prefer to make the move to the
> >     next-generation build tool. Using xml seemed as weird for a build as
> >     writing Makefiles. And it seems much less restrictive than maven
> is/was.
> >
> >
> > The biggest question I have is... why?
> >
> > What will changing build tools enable us to do that we can't with the
> > existing tools?
> >
> >     I still want to hear if there are any objections, even if it will
> only
> >     effect myself as I will be responsible for the rails2.0 build.
> >
> >     The other issue is to use installer to create packages for the
> different
> >     operating systems.
> >
> >
> >
> > Again... why?
> >
> > What benefit does this give us over the current distribution method?
> >
> >     Unfortunately I have not found any reasonable non-commercial tool for
> >     this task. However there are two installer products that provide free
> >     licenses to OS systems:
> >
> >     Install4j: Requires a link to their page
> >
> >     http://www.ej-technologies.com/buy/install4j/openSource/enter
> >
> >     Installbuilder: No such requirement
> >
> >
> http://installbuilder.bitrock.com/open-source-licenses.html?ModPagespeed=noscript
> >
> >     Does anyone of you have an objection or recommendation? If I do hear
> >     nothing negative I would apply for a free license for Rails for both
> >     products.
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm not immediately opposed to either idea, provided that there's a good
> > reason to spend the time on that instead of implementing other desirable
> > features.
> >
> > ---Brett.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Managing the Performance of Cloud-Based Applications
> > Take advantage of what the Cloud has to offer - Avoid Common Pitfalls.
> > Read the Whitepaper.
> >
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=121051231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rails-devel mailing list
> > Rai...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Managing the Performance of Cloud-Based Applications
> Take advantage of what the Cloud has to offer - Avoid Common Pitfalls.
> Read the Whitepaper.
>
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=121051231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>

Re: [Rails-devel] New build process and installer for Rails 2.0?

[John D. G. <jd...@di...>]

On 2014-02-05 04:45, Stefan Frey wrote:
> I intend to update the build process and suggest for this using gradle 
> (http://www.gradle.org).
> 
> I compared this to adding apache ivy (http://ant.apache.org/ivy/) and 
> stay with the previous ant/eclipse-build.
> 
> My strong feeling is that I prefer to make the move to the 
> next-generation build tool. Using xml seemed as weird for a build as 
> writing Makefiles. And it seems much less restrictive than maven is/was.
> 
> I still want to hear if there are any objections, even if it will only 
> effect myself as I will be responsible for the rails2.0 build.

The question is, will I still be able to build the dev tree in eclipse?

I feel I'm only started on the hugely hard, steep learning curve to be
able to safely write code for this project at all, and it seems like
everytime I turn around, someone wants to make a change like this one
which may be trivial for them but is likely a show stopper for me and
other new devs.




> 
> The other issue is to use installer to create packages for the different 
> operating systems.
> 
> Unfortunately I have not found any reasonable non-commercial tool for 
> this task. However there are two installer products that provide free 
> licenses to OS systems:
> 
> Install4j: Requires a link to their page
> 
> http://www.ej-technologies.com/buy/install4j/openSource/enter
> 
> Installbuilder: No such requirement
> 
> http://installbuilder.bitrock.com/open-source-licenses.html?ModPagespeed=noscript
> 
> Does anyone of you have an objection or recommendation? If I do hear 
> nothing negative I would apply for a free license for Rails for both 
> products.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Managing the Performance of Cloud-Based Applications
> Take advantage of what the Cloud has to offer - Avoid Common Pitfalls.
> Read the Whitepaper.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=121051231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
> 

Re: [Rails-devel] New build process and installer for Rails 2.0?

[Stefan F. <ste...@we...>]

No it should not be a show stopper for you, as running from/inside 
Eclipse will be the same as before.

I will keep Eclipse myself as development tool for this project, even if 
it is not my preferred one to ensure that it will always build without 
any problems inside Eclipse to avoid breaking it for others.

So usually you will only have to pull the new code and everything should 
build automatically in Eclipse. If it does not, please ask.

Build tool here refers to build process for the package to publish, 
which means creating the .jar file and to add all libraries and resource 
files into a compressed archive (.zip or .tar.gz) for a new release.

Stefan

On 02/06/2014 04:19 AM, John David Galt wrote:
> On 2014-02-05 04:45, Stefan Frey wrote:
>> I intend to update the build process and suggest for this using gradle
>> (http://www.gradle.org).
>>
>> I compared this to adding apache ivy (http://ant.apache.org/ivy/) and
>> stay with the previous ant/eclipse-build.
>>
>> My strong feeling is that I prefer to make the move to the
>> next-generation build tool. Using xml seemed as weird for a build as
>> writing Makefiles. And it seems much less restrictive than maven is/was.
>>
>> I still want to hear if there are any objections, even if it will only
>> effect myself as I will be responsible for the rails2.0 build.
>
> The question is, will I still be able to build the dev tree in eclipse?
>
> I feel I'm only started on the hugely hard, steep learning curve to be
> able to safely write code for this project at all, and it seems like
> everytime I turn around, someone wants to make a change like this one
> which may be trivial for them but is likely a show stopper for me and
> other new devs.
>
>
>
>
>>
>> The other issue is to use installer to create packages for the different
>> operating systems.
>>
>> Unfortunately I have not found any reasonable non-commercial tool for
>> this task. However there are two installer products that provide free
>> licenses to OS systems:
>>
>> Install4j: Requires a link to their page
>>
>> http://www.ej-technologies.com/buy/install4j/openSource/enter
>>
>> Installbuilder: No such requirement
>>
>> http://installbuilder.bitrock.com/open-source-licenses.html?ModPagespeed=noscript
>>
>> Does anyone of you have an objection or recommendation? If I do hear
>> nothing negative I would apply for a free license for Rails for both
>> products.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Managing the Performance of Cloud-Based Applications
>> Take advantage of what the Cloud has to offer - Avoid Common Pitfalls.
>> Read the Whitepaper.
>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=121051231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rails-devel mailing list
>> Rai...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Managing the Performance of Cloud-Based Applications
> Take advantage of what the Cloud has to offer - Avoid Common Pitfalls.
> Read the Whitepaper.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=121051231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-devel mailing list
> Rai...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rails-devel
>