I love your "it adds up" comment. I will steal this. It is very true for me as well.
Several years ago, I started using make extensively. Not to compile, but to automate. Make understands failing and dependencies. Also, bash and zsh have wonderful completions.
I used to write a bash or python script to do this. They often turned into their own projects and were painful to document.
A great make example (thanks Aaron) is on YT: Using Terraform, Packer, and Ansible Together": https://youtu.be/pkEezNSFWtA. Aaron automated it all with make.
Ya, I know... Make was created in 1976 to compile Fortran. It's old school. I love it.
I use it to test my kubernetes CSI driver on 5 versions of k3s with a single make call. That call is the tip of a dependency tree. The leaves end up being a line or three of bash running Ansible, Go, Helm, etc, but could be anything.
Documentation is simple because the make dependencies are so easy to follow. They are much of the documentation. The docs are correct because we execute them.
Several years ago, I started using make extensively. Not to compile, but to automate. Make understands failing and dependencies. Also, bash and zsh have wonderful completions.
I used to write a bash or python script to do this. They often turned into their own projects and were painful to document.
A great make example (thanks Aaron) is on YT: Using Terraform, Packer, and Ansible Together": https://youtu.be/pkEezNSFWtA. Aaron automated it all with make.
Ya, I know... Make was created in 1976 to compile Fortran. It's old school. I love it.
I use it to test my kubernetes CSI driver on 5 versions of k3s with a single make call. That call is the tip of a dependency tree. The leaves end up being a line or three of bash running Ansible, Go, Helm, etc, but could be anything.
Documentation is simple because the make dependencies are so easy to follow. They are much of the documentation. The docs are correct because we execute them.