Mage is a make/rake-like build tool using Go. You write plain-old go functions, and Mage automatically uses them as Makefile-like runnable targets.
Mage has no dependencies outside the Go standard library, and builds with Go 1.7 and above (possibly even lower versions, but they're not regularly tested).
Install mage by running
go get -u -d github.com/magefile/mage cd $GOPATH/src/github.com/magefile/mage go run bootstrap.go
This will download the code into your GOPATH, and then run the bootstrap script
to build mage with version infomation embedded in it. A normal
(without -d) will build the binary correctly, but no version info will be
embedded. If you've done this, no worries, just go to
$GOPATH/src/github.com/magefile/mage and run
mage install or
go run bootstrap.go and a new binary will be created with the correct version
The mage binary will be created in your $GOPATH/bin directory.
You may also install a binary release from our releases page.
#mage channel on gophers slack for discussion of usage, development, etc.
see magefile.org for full docs
see godoc.org/github.com/magefile/mage/mage for how to use mage as a library.
Makefiles are hard to read and hard to write. Mostly because makefiles are essentially fancy bash scripts with significant white space and additional make-related syntax.
Mage lets you have multiple magefiles, name your magefiles whatever you want, and they're easy to customize for multiple operating systems. Mage has no dependencies (aside from go) and runs just fine on all major operating systems, whereas make generally uses bash which is not well supported on Windows. Go is superior to bash for any non-trivial task involving branching, looping, anything that's not just straight line execution of commands. And if your project is written in Go, why introduce another language as idiosyncratic as bash? Why not use the language your contributors are already comfortable with?
- File conversion tasks