That’s about how long it takes on my clean Ubuntu Vagrant setup on a Macbook Air. Personally I’m not bothered by it (it sure beats the 30 seconds it took Grunt to compile) but it could be a memory or CPU constraint issue, particularly if you’re on a shared server. See if you can monitor things with top or htop to find out if there’s a heavy load on your server.
I’m also running gulp watch on a Vagrant VM, 1GB RAM.
If, however, somebody is bothered by the time it takes to recompile assets, I’m thinking that a solution would be to create a separate gulp task, e.g. ‘gulp css’, that would watch compile only *.less files and won’t run all the tasks that are currently fired off with ‘gulp watch’, e.i. styles, jshint, scripts, fonts, images, wiredep.
Obviously, this is not perfect since we would have to switch to the buil-in grunt watch if we want to recompile anything else than *.less, but the assumption is that you will spend most of your time tweaking styles.
Wow. It really took you that long with Grunt? I am not using Vagrant, but Grunt was always fast for me. I just tried it again on a past project on 6.x and it clocks in at around 5 seconds.
With a fresh install of Sage and using Gulp it takes about 20 seconds. Watching Ben’s screencast and where he talks about adding Fontawesome and running Gulp it looks like it is taking him about the same also. So, I figure it is what it is.
Mine’s taking 12 seconds to compile scripts and I only have a couple of extra bower packages and a tiny main.js file. I don’t understand how people are saying Grunt was slower. Previously, with my home-grown gruntfile this sort of thing took a couple of seconds at most and that was including linting, concating and uglifying many different packages. What’s taking so long?