[sf-perl] [meeting] Hudson and Perl - why?

James Briggs james at ActionMessage.com
Thu Jun 10 15:48:35 PDT 2010

On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 13:08:54 -0700, Fred Moyer wrote
> Joe McMahon will be talking about Hudson on June 22nd at 7pm, at the
> office of Mother Jones (located on Sutter street, please login to
> Meetup for the exact address).
> "Continuous integration" sounds like a great idea: you automatically
> run your build on every checkin, so you know very soon after you've
> committed if you make a mistake or checked in a bug. However, like 
> any properly lazy Perl programmer, the last thing you want to do is write
> more code; you want to take advantage of work that's already done:
> that's Hudson.

Hi folks.

I've worked as a build and release engineer on compiler projects with CI
tools like Buildbot. There was a clear benefit from continuous builds
with multiple programmers modifying a large C code base.

But since scripting languages don't have a compile or link stage, I'm a
little puzzled at the utility of Hudson with Perl projects.

I guess you could have Hudson run perl -c on each source file, and run
the tests.

(I just use a batch file for that on a 100,000 line Perl project.)

Anybody care to share some examples of using a CI tool with Perl where
there was a benefit to developers?


More information about the SanFrancisco-pm mailing list