[logback-dev] Running the logback project as a commitocracy

[Craig P. Motlin]

Yes, they are both in-language DSLs. Gradle seems like a next-generation ant
since it's very configurable. SBT seems like a next-generation maven since
projects retain the maven directory layout and have standard lifecycle steps
like compile and test.

I prefer Scala because of its type system and the fact that you can write a
library in Scala that can be used by Java code. The fact that Groovy's
syntax is closer to Java's is not appealing to me. The combination of Scala
+ SBT is very appealing.

Ceki, I saw you started experimenting with Scala by porting a few JUnit
tests. I took a crack at porting SizeBasedRolling test and submitted a pull
request in github. Please let me know what you think. I'd be happy to help
with future Scala/SBT experiments.

On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Ceki Gülcü <ceki at qos.ch> wrote:

> On 20/02/2011 5:00 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> > Gradle is a build tool, not a language. Joern was asking about it
> > replacing Maven.  I attended a presentation on Gradle at SpringOne and
> > concluded it wouldn't meet the needs of my organization - it is
> > somewhere between Ant and Maven.  It isn't clear to me why one would
> > want to switch from Maven to Gradle when the build is already working.
>
> AFAIK, Gradle is an in-language DSL. SBT is also an in-language DSL
> but in Scala. When you choose betweenr Gradle or SBT, you are also
> making a choice between Groovy and Scala to some extent.
>
> So, yes, it may seem that my answer to Joern was off topic but the
> language question bears some relevance to the topic at hand.
>
>> Ralph
>>
> --
> Ceki
> _______________________________________________
> logback-dev mailing list
> logback-dev at qos.ch
> http://qos.ch/mailman/listinfo/logback-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://qos.ch/pipermail/logback-dev/attachments/20110220/898621fc/attachment.html>