On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Stephen Connolly
<stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Take care to note that in my original vision I did not assume Type 2 was
> bound to Jenkins, only bound to *a* CI system... Then I said how literate
> was my vision of solving the problem *for* Jenkins.
But conceptually, a CI system should just integrate and automate the
stuff that would already work as separate steps that you could run
without it. Or you are introducing magic instead of integration.
> This falls back to my philosophy for tools (which you may know if you follow
> the maven lists) namely, don't force the user to stick with your tool if you
> can help it. Let them try other tools and stick with you *because* you are
> the best, not because they've been locked in.
>
> That is how I see tools being successful and staying so... If I am
> successful with my vision, maven 4 will lure you back in and reward you for
> experimenting with it (even if you don't stay... Though we'd prefer if you
> do ;-) )
Experimenting is easier and more likely to go forward if it doesn't
require infrastructure changes.
>> Is there a standalone literate-builder that the developer can
>> run/test/debug on his own without jenkins support?
>
>
> Yes but very very bare bones (literate-cli) and I am not sure how far mic
> got with it!
I'd expect much faster acceptance with a full standalone version that
did exactly the same things except from a checked out local workspace.
I wouldn't expect people to write make/cmake/project(etc.) files
without the ability to run/test them locally before committing and
don't see much difference here (except maybe automatic branch tracking
for other versions).
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Jenkins Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to jenkinsci-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
