This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
This subarticle is kept separate from the main article, Build automation, due to size or style considerations. |
I'm not sure what is meant by "Make-based". I think what might be meant is "make-like". --Edalytical (talk) 04:25, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
There are no reason to break out the make-based tools uniquely, except possibly to mention make in the history of build automation. The list is in fact incorrect. Build tools should probably be organized based on ability to do source code and binary dependency management vs. workflow automation, and whether the tool is an interpreter for a scripting language (make, Ant) or does not require scripting (OpenMake). Seanblanton (talk) 21:50, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
The choice of entries looks strange, what is the criteria, why not to put Redo not yet in Wikipedia, Scons and Waf which have their wikipedia page, Buildout that is also in Wikipedia and link to this true page, and probably most of the Category: Build automation and Category: Compiling tools? --marc (talk) 20:58, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
Shouldn't make-alikes list include Borland make, at least for historical reasons? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.140.244.14 (talk) 16:09, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
I see what the article is trying to achieve and I agree that that the way it is split out is awkward.
--Rriehle (talk) 15:30, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Another build tool for python (maven-like): https://pybuilder.github.io/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.192.66.236 (talk) 11:41, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
"Configuration Management Tools" section should not be here; there already is one at List_of_revision_control_software
78.141.139.10 (talk) 15:36, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Concur, though a link to the list of configuration management tools would be very useful. The tools listed in the configuration management section are not project configuration management tools (which is what is what one usually thinks about when doing software builds). These tools are system configuration tools, which is useful for network administrators but not so relevant for software authors. Unless the Wikipedia author community decides otherwise, this section should be replaced with a link to sw project configuration management tools. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.127.239.146 (talk) 00:24, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Template:Editnotices/Page/List of build automation software - that all entries should already have an article. Any objections? - David Gerard (talk) 11:55, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
@David: You reverted my addition to the list, and then I saw this rule about entries needing an article. I'm new to editing wikipedia, so I'm not sure if this is the right place to talk, but to avoid future mistakes I have to ask: is this a general rule adopted by wikipedia for all lists (the "Template" seem to point in this direction) or is this specific to this page (I certainly saw many wiki lists with items without articles, e.g. Comparison_of_continuous_integration_software).
Can you please clarify? There's probably a good reason for the rule: I get the goal to have a consistent encyclopedia, but on the other hand I'm afraid it adds a barrier to keeping lists up to date. For example I can always find 5 minutes to add an item with a 1-liner summary + informative external links, but currently I'm not committed to writing a full article. Thanks for your feedback - Antoine Poliakov (talk) 15:38, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
We might note that (almost?) any scripting language can be used to construct a build automation. Personally I just use a BASH script to automate the build of any of my larger project, (be they C/C++ Haskell Perl or even Java). I would be interested to know how many people/projects also use BASH for build automation. alexx (talk) 12:01, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
As far as I know, [| gruntjs] is also used as a build automation tool - but where to put it in this list?
93.231.132.207 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 14:24, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Opus Make has existing for a very long time, but unfortunately hasn't been updated in years. Opus is very powerful. http://www.opussoftware.com/ • Sbmeirow • Talk • 19:31, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
There is a new free build automation toolbox made with powershell: http://www.crawler-lib.net/build-tools — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.171.98.25 (talk) 16:43, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
It is promising but there is no actual release at the moment. 93.222.146.1 (talk) 11:47, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Release is available now 84.171.122.97 (talk) 00:05, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Cross platform YAML based build tool for C/C++/Obj-C/C#/CUDA/opencl. https://github.com/mkn/mkn • Edit made by Maiken author 10:28, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Is there any particular reason Cake isn't on the list? http://cakebuild.net/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Icecream-burglar (talk • contribs) 07:22, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
Tedtoal (talk) 18:30, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
What is the point of this article? It tells the reader that there are about 40 different build tools. How does this help anybody? It might be useful to explain why projects using some combinations of programming languages can't be built using the old standard tools like make. It might also be useful to state, for each build tool, what kinds of projects it can build efficiently. Longitude2 (talk) 13:52, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
Curious why the article policy for no red links? Red links are reasonably common in list articles. Is there some quality of software build tools that makes red links undesirable? If so, what is it? Brycehughes (talk) 01:31, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
Message:
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello, my name is Alyona Chernyaeva and I’m an employee of JetBrains. I work in the JetBrains Space team as a marketing specialist. We are reviewing Wikipedia articles that relate to our areas and would like our product to be listed in the article. Please review the description below and let me know if it is acceptable to you. Thank you very much for your consideration.
Continuous integration
JetBrains Space, (Space Automation), a continuous delivery service along with a solution for a broad spectrum of automation tasks.
Alyona na (talk) 18:44, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
a-a-p link lead to Bram Moolenaar page, not to the tool page. XP_2600 (talk) 09:30, 22 October 2023 (UTC)