Beginning of $.02 I've used ANT and make for our products. Contrary to the hype, I don't think ANT is any easier to use than make, and with the added versatility of make, IMHO go with make. If anyone tells you that the XML in ant is easier to code because it doesn't have all those tabs, their full of it. CVS, make, and rsh for multi-platform products. Throw in some perl for those real tough source translation stuff (like converting a C++ header file with build info into a java module). End of $.02 "bfriedman at excite.com" wrote: > > I am in the process of setting up some QA tools for a small company > (10-15 developers). > > I have already installed CVS on a redhat box. > > I wanted to ask for list input on a couple of things: > 1. Has anyone used Bugzilla for external (client) bug tracking? Or > just Bugzilla in general? If so, how well does it work for you, and do > you have any problems with it? > 2. I have previously used Rational products (as a user, not admin), > including their build tool. Rational is a bit over the budget for my > shop ;) I am considering using Ant to track Visual C++ and > miscellaneous files. Has anyone used Ant (or another open source build > tool) in combination with version control? Any comments on Ant or > other tools? I am looking for something that isn't a beast to admin. > > Any comments would be appreciated. > > Thanks, > > Brent Friedman > > "I am looking for a man with six fingers on his left hand." > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com > The most personalized portal on the Web!