[Mono-dev] gendarme: nant build files
sebastien.pouliot at gmail.com
Wed Aug 30 08:16:14 EDT 2006
It's funny how many build system suggestions you can get. A few more
days and we will have more (possible) build system than rules for
However it's a little sad when I compare this number with the offers to
maintaining (versus just naming a tool, or dropping a patch) the new
build system(s) :-(
Now I can't image what the email would have looked like if I had said
that I wasn't open to a third *contributor-maintained* build
p.s. Nothing personal Curtis, I'm just realigning the thread ;-)
On Tue, 2006-08-29 at 01:02 -0700, Curtis Wensley wrote:
> Why not use .net prebuild?
> It can generate nant, vs2003, vs2005, monodevelop, and sharpdevelop
> projects/solutions from a single xml definition. This cuts down maintenance
> of project files quite tremendously. It is here:
> This can be used during tarball creation or deployment to generate all the
> necessary project files automatically.
> On Monday 28 August 2006 14:39, Sebastien Pouliot wrote:
> Hello Christian,
> On Mon, 2006-08-28 at 23:13 +0200, Christian Birkl wrote:
> > Since i'm a windows user (I don't believe I've said this loud) it is
> > really hard for me to run the Makefile based build.
> Using the Makefile should work using cygwin (and I can't believe I'm
> suggesting cygwin to someone ;-)
> > Also MonoDevelop is just available for *nis (last time i checked) so
> > no chance for us windows developers to build gendarme out of the box.
> > I get your point with the outdating - but currently as a windows
> > developer you just get the source and need to manually create either
> > VS projects or nant build files. By providing at least nant build
> > files one may easier begin patching gendarme than without.
> I understand this issue, which is why I'm open to a third build system.
> But, like I said, I don't have any NAnt knowledge myself so someone else
> needs to step up for it ;-)
> Why ? because once this is in SVN/tarballs people will expect it to be
> maintained (even if I write "use at your own risk" in the README).
> > Since I'm not that involved in other projects - how do other handle
> > this issue with "build files"?
> I suspect they each build their own project file (e.g. in VS.NET) and
> yes this is clearly inefficient.
> Now one of my computers is a WinXP box with VS.NET 2005, so I may take
> the time to create a VS.NET solution in the future as, somehow, it make
> sense "test-wise" and commit it into SVN (if there is demand for it).
> But I'm still open to a contributor-supported NAnt build ;-)
> > Christian
> > 2006/8/28, Sebastien Pouliot <sebastien.pouliot at gmail.com>:
> > Hello Christian,
> > On Mon, 2006-08-28 at 22:47 +0200, Christian Birkl wrote:
> > > Hello all,
> > >
> > > attached a NAnt build file for build and running gendarme.
> > Two things
> > > bug me currently which should be corrected by someone who
> > has more
> > > experiences with nant build files:
> > We already have 2 build systems (Makefile and MonoDevelop) for
> > Gendarme.
> > I don't mind adding a third one, but I don't want to maintain
> > it ;-)
> > Will you maintain it ? (*)
> > (*) which also means that it will get deleted if it gets
> > outdated and
> > not updated for a while (i.e. after I get angry few emails
> > about it ;-)
> > > - Mono.Cecil location must be specified as property (a
> > dynamic lookup
> > > in gac/pkg-config would be nice)
> > > - same with nunit.framework if you want to run the unit
> > tests.
> > I don't know much about NAnt myself. Maybe Gert could help you
> > with this ?
> > Thanks
> > p.s. let fix those issues before committing the build file (as
> > I
> > *really* want running the unit tests to be as easy as
> > possible).
> > --
> > Sebastien Pouliot <sebastien at ximian.com>
> > Blog: http://pages.infinit.net/ctech/
> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
Sebastien Pouliot <sebastien at ximian.com>
More information about the Mono-devel-list