Migraine vs. other tools

This guide compares Migraine with other popular workflow automation tools and traditional shell scripting approaches.

Quick Comparison Table

Detailed Comparisons

Migraine vs Shell Scripts

Shell Scripts

👍 Advantages:

• Universal availability
• No additional dependencies
• Full system access
• Maximum flexibility

👎 Disadvantages:

• No built-in templating
• Manual variable management
• Platform-specific syntax
• No standardized structure
• Error-prone
• Limited reusability

Migraine

👍 Advantages:

• Structured workflow definition
• Built-in variable management
• Pre-flight validation
• Template system
• Cross-platform compatibility
• Reusable components
• Standardized format

👎 Disadvantages:

• Additional tool to install
• Learning curve for syntax
• Less flexible than raw shell scripts

Example Comparison

Shell Script Approach

#!/bin/bash

# Manual variable definition
PROJECT_PATH=$1
DEPENDENCIES=$2

# Manual error checking
if [ -z "$PROJECT_PATH" ]; then
    echo "Error: PROJECT_PATH is required"
    exit 1
fi

# Manual directory check
if [ ! -d "$PROJECT_PATH" ]; then
    mkdir -p "$PROJECT_PATH"
fi

# Main logic
cd "$PROJECT_PATH" || exit
npm init -y
if [ -n "$DEPENDENCIES" ]; then
    npm install "$DEPENDENCIES"
fi

Migraine Approach

{
  "name": "Node.js Setup",
  "pre_checks": [
    {
      "command": "test -d {{PROJECT_PATH}} || mkdir -p {{PROJECT_PATH}}",
      "description": "ensure project directory exists"
    }
  ],
  "steps": [
    {
      "command": "cd {{PROJECT_PATH}} && npm init -y",
      "description": "initialize project"
    },
    {
      "command": "cd {{PROJECT_PATH}} && npm install {{DEPENDENCIES}}",
      "description": "install dependencies"
    }
  ]
}

Migraine vs Make

Make

👍 Advantages:

• Widely available
• Good for build systems
• Target dependency management
• Parallel execution

👎 Disadvantages:

• Complex syntax
• Limited template support
• No built-in variable validation
• Primarily focused on build processes

Migraine

👍 Advantages:

• Modern JSON-based syntax
• Built for workflow automation
• Strong variable management
• Remote template loading
• Pre-flight validation

👎 Disadvantages:

• Not designed for build systems
• No parallel execution
• Newer, smaller community

Example Comparison

Makefile Approach

PROJECT_PATH ?= .
DEPENDENCIES ?=

.PHONY: setup install

setup:
    mkdir -p $(PROJECT_PATH)
    cd $(PROJECT_PATH) && npm init -y

install:
    cd $(PROJECT_PATH) && npm install $(DEPENDENCIES)

Migraine Approach

{
  "name": "Project Setup",
  "actions": {
    "setup": {
      "command": "mkdir -p {{PROJECT_PATH}} && cd {{PROJECT_PATH}} && npm init -y",
      "description": "initialize project"
    },
    "install": {
      "command": "cd {{PROJECT_PATH}} && npm install {{DEPENDENCIES}}",
      "description": "install dependencies"
    }
  }
}

Migraine vs NPM Scripts

NPM Scripts

👍 Advantages:

• Integrated with Node.js projects
• Simple syntax
• Package.json integration
• Huge ecosystem

👎 Disadvantages:

• Limited to Node.js projects
• Basic script running
• No built-in templating
• Limited workflow control

Migraine

👍 Advantages:

• Language agnostic
• Advanced workflow control
• Template system
• Pre-flight checks
• Variable management

👎 Disadvantages:

• Separate tool installation
• Not integrated with package managers
• Additional configuration files

Example Comparison

NPM Scripts Approach

{
  "scripts": {
    "setup": "mkdir -p $PROJECT_PATH && cd $PROJECT_PATH && npm init -y",
    "install-deps": "cd $PROJECT_PATH && npm install $DEPENDENCIES"
  }
}

Migraine Approach

{
  "name": "Node.js Project Setup",
  "pre_checks": [
    {
      "command": "node --version",
      "description": "check node installation"
    }
  ],
  "actions": {
    "setup": {
      "command": "mkdir -p {{PROJECT_PATH}} && cd {{PROJECT_PATH}} && npm init -y",
      "description": "initialize project"
    },
    "install": {
      "command": "cd {{PROJECT_PATH}} && npm install {{DEPENDENCIES}}",
      "description": "install dependencies"
    }
  }
}

When to Choose Migraine

Choose Migraine When You Need:

• Reusable workflow templates
• Strong variable management
• Pre-flight validation
• Cross-platform compatibility
• Team standardization
• Remote template sharing
• Workflow versioning

Consider Alternatives When:

• You need maximum flexibility (Shell Scripts)
• You're focused on build systems (Make)
• You're working exclusively with Node.js (NPM Scripts)
• You need CI/CD integration (GitHub Actions)
• You need parallel execution (Make/GitHub Actions)

Migration Guides

From Shell Scripts to Migraine

1. Identify repeated patterns in scripts
2. Extract variables and commands
3. Create workflow templates
4. Add pre-flight checks
5. Define discrete actions

From Make to Migraine

1. Convert targets to actions
2. Transform variables to Migraine format
3. Add pre-flight checks
4. Create workflow templates

From NPM Scripts to Migraine

1. Convert scripts to actions
2. Extract environment variables
3. Add pre-flight validation
4. Create reusable templates

Best Practices for Migration

1. Start with Simple Workflows

   • Convert basic scripts first
   • Add complexity gradually
   • Test thoroughly

2. Use Hybrid Approach Initially

   • Keep complex scripts
   • Migrate gradually
   • Maintain backwards compatibility

3. Document Changes

   • Note differences
   • Update team documentation
   • Provide migration guides

4. Focus on Benefits

   • Enhance reusability
   • Add pre-flight checks
   • Improve variable management

Conclusion

Migraine provides a modern approach to workflow automation, combining the best aspects of traditional tools with modern features like templating and validation. While it may not replace all use cases for traditional tools, it offers significant advantages for teams looking to standardize and automate their development workflows.