A community for everything relating to the linux operating system
Also check out [email protected]
Original icon base courtesy of [email protected] and The GIMP
The only feature that vanilla Make doesn’t have over this is solid Windows support.
I’ve evaluated a ton of these tools for CI/CD processes and common task management. So far I have found that Make is the best solution for task management unless you need strong Windows support. If you want to go crazy, you can use Autotools but that’s really only for builds not tasks. I get it; it’s cool to reinvent the wheel with a new feature that makes one thing a little bit easier.
I mean, I doubt the Windows support is particularly solid here either. Using shell commands to formulate tasks will never be great for Windows, because the shell ecosystem is simply Linux.
I agree. The only one that was close for me is Just. It is just Makefiles but without all the baggage.
yaml
🤮
As someone that uses both Java and k8s at work. I’ll take yaml over xml any day of the week. Maven build files are like 50% useless fluff.
There's not exactly a dichotomy there...
Just saying, it could be worse and some of us don’t mind yaml ;)
It’s also a lot better than doing it in 100% C++ templates!
There's mage which lets you write tasks in go instead of yaml.
I know someone that will find this interesting.
Thanks!
What about just, written in Rust?
That is already used in many projects.
Because it's written in Rust.
Seriously, though; there are a dozen widely used make systems, most of which are more widely used than just. People have ideas and think they can improve. As far as it goes, having a bunch of different make options is one of the least annoying areas; diversity is mostly hidden from end users, and you only really have to learn it if you plan on becoming a contributor.
However, if you're asking for a comparison table, a "why is this better than make, or ant, or maven, or cmake, or ninja, or just, or rake," then yeah, I agree. Having a brief elevator pitch is appreciated.
Thanks