The name is not very google friendly. It took me a bit longer than I would have liked to find examples for my specific use-case.
I could see them using "plzbuild" as their version of "golang", for the same problem.
Please – A Cross-Language Build System
31–40 of 122 posts
Re: Please – A Cross-Language Build System
#32I dislike that the only way they list to install is "curl https://get.please.build | bash". I know it's fast and easy but it really leaves your computer at their mercy.
How? It's over HTTPS, and you're already trusting them to execute code on your system... and it's not even root...
I see no way in which this "leaves your computer at their mercy" more than any other process of purposefully executing code they control on your system.
Re: Please – A Cross-Language Build System
#33Apologies in advance for shitting on this, but PLEASE STOP BUILDING BUILD SYSTEMS.
We already have a serious incompatibility problem with projects using autotools vs CMake vs Meson vs gyp vs Boost.Build vs SCons vs BUCK vs... and now we throw Please onto the pile.
It sucks when you find a smallish library and discover it uses an esoteric build system whose dependencies dwarf the library themselves (cough Yoga). The OSS community needs build system consolidation, not tacking on a 15th wheel to the cart.
Read the FAQ, it's just bananas:
> It [Bazel] is a great system but we have slightly different goals
> We preferred [Buck] to other options available, but again we're focused on different goals
> we didn't think it [Pants] was the ideal fit for us at the time
"All other systems had slightly different goals or weren't the exactly ideal fit, so rather than contribute to or extend them we poured an enormous amount of energy into rebuilding them in a slightly different way."
Re: Please – A Cross-Language Build System
#34Cross language but not cross platform -- no windows support, and none planned.
Wow. How is a system not supporting the most widespread desktop platform on the planet claiming to be cross-platform? Having said that, there might be a way. From their FAQ: > It might well be possible to make it work using Cygwin or MinGW / MSYS, or the recent Ubuntu on Windows development though. We aren't doing this work ourselves because we don't have any Windows machines, but we're happy to accept PRs in that di…
Cross-platform just means more than one platform. Nothing more. There's segments of developer market that don't need Windows support. Those targeting Linux/BSD, Mac desktops + Linux-based backends (i.e. cloud), multiple UNIXen (eg Linux + Solaris), embedded developed on Linux boxes, etc.
I encourage Windows versions of cross-platform apps wherever the app could justify it due to all the developers and tooling on Windows. Yet, non-Windows apps can be cross-platform.
Re: Please – A Cross-Language Build System
#35I dislike that the only way they list to install is "curl https://get.please.build | bash". I know it's fast and easy but it really leaves your computer at their mercy.
How? It's over HTTPS, and you're already trusting them to execute code on your system... and it's not even root... I see no way in which this "leaves your computer at their mercy" more than any other process of purposefully executing code they control on your system.
Are there any serious comparisons with package managers versus curl-to-bash? Seems as if there are a lot of trade-offs.
Re: Please – A Cross-Language Build System
#36I dislike that the only way they list to install is "curl https://get.please.build | bash". I know it's fast and easy but it really leaves your computer at their mercy.
How? It's over HTTPS, and you're already trusting them to execute code on your system... and it's not even root... I see no way in which this "leaves your computer at their mercy" more than any other process of purposefully executing code they control on your system.
I agree with the point you’re making and you clearly know what you’re talking about but:
I would caution you to use the phrase “no way in which” when discussing security - the less informed may read this and believe it.
While an edge case and requiring a mailicious targeted attack in this case there’s at least the possibility of being MiTM’d.
The problem - as you’re probably aware - with using absolute terms when speaking about a case like this is that it’s easy to extrapolate this sense of safety to something that may lead to an attack that requires much less precision thank convincing the browser that the MiTM proxy is “please.build”.
Re: Please – A Cross-Language Build System
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow. How is a system not supporting the most widespread desktop platform on the planet claiming to be cross-platform? Having said that, there might be a way. From their FAQ: > It might well be possible to make it work using Cygwin or MinGW / MSYS, or the recent Ubuntu on Windows development though. We aren't doing this work ourselves because we don't have any Windows machines, but we're happy to accept PRs in that di…
Cross-platform just means more than one platform. Nothing more. There's segments of developer market that don't need Windows support. Those targeting Linux/BSD, Mac desktops + Linux-based backends (i.e. cloud), multiple UNIXen (eg Linux + Solaris), embedded developed on Linux boxes, etc. I encourage Windows versions of cross-platform apps wherever the app could justify it due to all the developers and tooling on Wind…
they could be cross platform, but thats not really what people think.. when someone says cross platform i definitely expect windows support
Re: Please – A Cross-Language Build System
#38Why would I use this instead of Nix?
Re: Please – A Cross-Language Build System
#39This looks so similar to Bazel.. What's the advantage of using Please?
There's a section in the FAQ titled "WHY USE PLEASE INSTEAD OF BAZEL, BUCK OR PANTS?" https://please.build/faq.html
i read that part but the explanation is poor at best... basically they dont like the jvm because. and thats all that they really said
Re: Please – A Cross-Language Build System
#40Apologies in advance for shitting on this, but PLEASE STOP BUILDING BUILD SYSTEMS. We already have a serious incompatibility problem with projects using autotools vs CMake vs Meson vs gyp vs Boost.Build vs SCons vs BUCK vs... and now we throw Please onto the pile. It sucks when you find a smallish library and discover it uses an esoteric build system whose dependencies dwarf the library themselves (cough Yoga). The O…
PRs welcome
This is awful demanding. Not entirely unexpected in tech tho
“Why don’t others fix my frustration in open source projects!” they shout with no hint of irony