|
Shaggar posted:a pom defines what you want your project to be and maven makes that happen. it would be nice if there were a lot more documentation that actually explained the "magic" parts, so that you had a better idea of what was going on
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 16:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 13:09 |
|
|
if you are writing scripts for a build you hosed up. you are doing it wrong. it is not 1970 you don't need to do that anymore. there is litterrally no reason to do what you are doing and you are making your code worse for everyone
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 16:49
|
|
|
prefect posted:it would be nice if there were a lot more documentation that actually explained the "magic" parts, so that you had a better idea of what was going on all you need to know is what you want to do, not how it works. I don't care how the war packager does what it does cause its irrelevant, I just want the project packaged in a war. maven plugins are 3rd party libraries. you wouldn't write your own xml parser so why would you write your own war packager?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 16:52
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:all you need to know is what you want to do, not how it works. I don't care how the war packager does what it does cause its irrelevant, I just want the project packaged in a war. it's probably because i do very little work in java, but i get confused about just how all the requisite files should be arranged and exactly what comes out the other end and how to modify things to get what i need 
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
how do learn maven! book?!?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
the best way to learn maven is to work with someone who knows maven. the second best way is to just use it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:if you are writing scripts for a build you hosed up. you are doing it wrong. it is not 1970 you don't need to do that anymore. there is litterrally no reason to do what you are doing and you are making your code worse for everyone well don't you need a source control update then a mvn clean install
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 17:13
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:the best way to learn maven is to work with someone who knows maven. the second best way is to just use it. that first thing sounds like it would kick major rear end, but i was in a situation where i had to figure it all out 
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 17:13
|
|
|
thats like a two lines right there. then you have to do something with the artifacts! thats another copy command!
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 17:13
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:well don't you need a source control update then a mvn clean install your ide will do that for you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:the best way to learn maven is to work with someone who knows maven. the second best way is to just use it. i have no idea what maven is doing i've also never built a maven project or artifact or whatever that didnt already have all the crazy xml already there
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:your ide will do that for you. automatic builds don't have an ide of course if you use maven you'll only need to drag blocks around in jenkins so i guess thats not a script either
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 17:21
|
|
|
gonadic io posted:i'm being a teaching assistant for first year beginner haskell again this term! another semester of saying "yes that's how you'd do it in c but haskell is different" and 50% of them them saying "it's different? it sucks!" can't believe y'all have classes in Haskell. is it like a functional programming course or something? the only one you can take here is student taught(and it only happens if there's a student willing to teach it).
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
what do build engineers do. is there supposed to be like a 30 step manual process to release a build. i have a feeling my company is rear end backwards in every way but im a terrible programmer so idk
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
gonadic io posted:i'm being a teaching assistant for first year beginner haskell again this term! another semester of saying "yes that's how you'd do it in c but haskell is different" and 50% of them them saying "it's different? it sucks!" That's pretty cool but would first years really be like that? I thought that would be the best time to introduce them to a functional language before they have much/any experience with programming in general
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
lmao so Xamarin willingly pushed an update to stable that included this issue and now you can't build anything, good job good effort https://bugzilla.xamarin.com/show_bug.cgi?id=25841
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
Valeyard posted:That's pretty cool but would first years really be like that? I thought that would be the best time to introduce them to a functional language before they have much/any experience with programming in general that depends on your first years obv, when I was in school a large percentage of us going into computer science had many years of programming already under our belts (10 for me and many others who had learned Logo in elementary school)
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
Valeyard posted:That's pretty cool but would first years really be like that? I thought that would be the best time to introduce them to a functional language before they have much/any experience with programming in general one semester is the perfect time for them to be convinced of how programming works by rote without them really getting the chance to think about it critically yet. i mean it's not so bad in general but there are always a few who spend far more time complaining about how hard a subject is more than doing any work on it
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:a pom defines what you want your project to be and maven makes that happen. these things are all true.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
Flat Daddy posted:what do build engineers do. is there supposed to be like a 30 step manual process to release a build. i have a feeling my company is rear end backwards in every way but im a terrible programmer so idk you start with a giant manual process and then you automate that
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
prefect posted:you start with a giant manual process and then you automate that yep i guess i'm technically our 'build engineer' and it's just 'push button, receive software' except in prod, they wouldn't let us set that up even if i wasn't the one pushing the button. i guess that's going to change though, or so i heard through the grapevine
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
Cold on a Cob posted:yep keep chanting "continuous delivery" and talk about how etsy deploys code changes automatically if they pass tests -- takes a half-hour, i think 
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:these things are all true. except for the shell script bit, ant is terrible at everything shell is competent at
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
Did they push out a Maven build that supports Java 8 yet? Because 
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
tef posted:except for the shell script bit, ant is terrible at everything shell is competent at ok, pretend he said tcsh
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 00:46
|
|
|
Flat Daddy posted:what do build engineers do regret their career choices.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 02:07
|
|
|
the nice thing about the shell/python/whatever build system is that it takes all the magic out of the build and makes it explicit. that's a nice feature of ant, but unfortunately as pointed out ant, in what is probably the stupidest idea I can think of right now, tries to wedge a scripting language into XML of all things maven is nice, but there are too many hidden things in it for my tastes. just write your build scripts in whatever actual scripting languages you like best.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 02:13
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:all you need to know is what you want to do, not how it works. Shaggar posted:the best way to learn maven is to work with someone who knows maven. the second best way is to just use it. that's ruby talk maven is amazingly reliable and consistent, but the documentation is frequently poo poo and ime will mostly tell you that a tag exists but nothing about how to properly use it or even where it goes
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 02:24
|
|
|
build scripts are the worst cause now you have to manage the scripts + the environment in addition to your code. w/ maven the goal is to make your builds repeatable. it doesn't matter if its 3 years later and your build server is completely different because your pom defines specific plugins + libs to build your code. w/ ant its all about hunting through the ant scripts to make sure the environment is setup in what you think is the same way and that you have the right libs cause when they originally did this script they assumed the libs lived on the build server. I mean yeah eventually you might be able to get a working build that you think is the same thing, but who knows and you wasted a day working on it. meanwhile the maven project from 3 years ago was checked out and built w/out issue. I cant think of any legitimate reason to be using build scripts in 2015
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 02:26
|
|
|
also the stuff that's hidden in maven is the same stuff hidden in cp or mv or scp, etc..
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 02:27
|
|
|
I'm not about to have an actual software discussion with shaggar so: Shaggar posted:also the stuff that's hidden in maven is the same stuff hidden in cp or mv or scp, etc.. lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:use buck we use buck for our android stuff b/c the guy who set it up was ex-facebook, i don't have the slightest idea how to work with it beyond "buck build", do you have a good resource re: that
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
i finally got pressured to start using cmake b/c of clion, and i don't want to write a regular makefile ever again
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 02:40
|
|
|
in fairness, i didn't really want to write them before
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 02:40
|
|
|
fritz posted:we use buck for our android stuff b/c the guy who set it up was ex-facebook, i don't have the slightest idea how to work with it beyond "buck build", do you have a good resource re: that I learned enough from http://facebook.github.io/buck/ to convert a project , when we first released it. (my team built it, but I hadn't used it myself so I tested the docs.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 02:46
|
|
|
rotor posted:I'm not about to have an actual software discussion with shaggar so: "how is this maven plugin copying the files?!?! I just don't know and i cant deal with it!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
Shaggar posted:build scripts are the worst cause now you have to manage the scripts + the environment in addition to your code. i cant imagine any legitimate reason to spend time trying to compile code from 2012
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 05:02
|
|
|
MALE SHOEGAZE posted:i cant imagine any legitimate reason to spend time trying to compile code from 2012 ship stuff people use for more than a year
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 05:18
|
|
|
MALE SHOEGAZE posted:i cant imagine any legitimate reason to spend time trying to compile code from 2012 "remember that time when we did that thing which was a demo but then we showed it to a customer and you spent a week cursing and drawing diagrams with those silly faces on all the whiteboards? i know you said that was just in a 'branch', but we can still do that right?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 05:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 13:09 |
|
|
but don't bitch out with "the pom says what version" and hope that the maven hivemind will have the same thing waiting for you, and that there aren't javac or jvm changes. if you're serious about reproducibility, you check in the toolchain and all deps. every version of every compiler that MSFT has ever used to ship something outside the company is in their big repository of all-knowingness. need to build *exactly* XP SP1 with a single value changed? yeah, they can do that, and they can count on the fact that they did it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2015 05:21
|
|