See below:
On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 6:06 AM Neil C Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, 19 Sept 2025 at 00:37, Blake McBride <[email protected]> wrote: > > Again, one example of the many reasons I wrote bld. > > I thought bld was created by Geert Bevin?? > Although there may be other build systems named *bld*, the one I use was written by me. > > > IMO, imperative build systems are better, period. > > Couldn't disagree more, and I suspect you'll find a lot of people > around the NetBeans ecosystem are unlikely to agree with that > statement either. In fact, statements like these always remind me of > Jaroslav's post on Gradle https://wiki.apidesign.org/wiki/Gradle Indeed, for 90% of projects that are straightforward Java projects, Maven is a great tool. The problem is the other 10% who want or need to go past the traditional structure. This is often done for very valid reasons. In my case, could I shoehorn my system into a traditional structure? Yes, but very important aspects of the system would be lost. I didn't structure Kiss to do it "my way." I believe in sticking with standards as far as possible. Those standards inhibited important features I wanted to add to the system. Thus the break with standards. I tried very hard to get Maven and Gradle to do what I wanted. I actually succeeded, but I ended up with build files that no one, including me, could ever understand. Thus *bld*. > Still, it's possible the Ant freeform project could be made to work > with bld. In some ways it would be nice to have a more generic, > declarative project type for integrating with other build systems - as > a fallback. I remember starting to look at something after discussing > Bach at FOSDEM 2020, but life got in the way that year and I never did > get that far with it. > While old Ant is (surprisingly) more powerful than Maven in certain cases, Ant's use of XML is rats' next unnecessary nightmare. I would suggest INI file format. It's clean and easy to understand and edit. > > > Clearly, pom.xml files are inadequate. Perhaps NetBeans can lead the way. > > Given NetBeans' ethos of being a UI for the build system, it is > already leading the way in my opinion. Let's not make it worse in the > process! ;-) > The new build structure could use a specific file name that doesn't clash with anything. When NetBeans starts up, it could look for it. If not found, just do what NetBeans already does. No loss of functionality. Blake > > Best wishes, > > Neil >
