I've made an inventory of issue we need to tackle better soon than late,
some of them have been discussed before, but I think its best to bring them
up again in order to have an agreement (and solution) for all "issues" :
1. Resgen can be used to compile multiple resource files at once, and we
already support this. However, we do not have a way to specifiy the output
file for each individual resource file. This is not possible right now, as
we use a fileset to specify the input resources, so the number of input
files is not fixed. In some cases, using files matching a certain pattern is
great, but in cases like this here, its a major PITA. Allowing multiple
input files, and corresponding output files in a single run of the <resgen>
task would be very good for the performance of the <solution> task ... Are
we gonna support this ? If we do : how ?
2. We should support explicit manifest resource names to be specified for
individual resources that need to be embedded/linked (using the compiler or
3. MS.NET 2.0 has new features related to resource files that will be quite
a challenge to us :
- resgen has a new option (/str) with which you can instruct resgen to
create a strongly-typed resource class, with this option you can set the
programming langugage, namespace, class name and file name (for the
generated resource class). How will we support this ? Will we also need to
support this in the compiler tasks, or do we expect users to use another
task (resgen?) to generate the strongly-typed resource classes first, and
then use the compiler tasks ?
- .NET 2.0 allows a access modfier to be specified for embedded and linked
resources. Again, this doesn't work very wel in combination with a fileset,
as you would not be able to set access modifiers on individual files.
Now, the question is : how do we proceed on all this ? I'd suggest we all
have a closer look, and please speak up if you have any ideas, remarks, ...
I don't think we should underestimate the impact of all this, but we cannot
avoid this ...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gert Driesen" <gert.driesen@...>
To: "Ian MacLean" <ianm@...>
Cc: "Nant-Developers (E-Mail)" <nant-developers@...>
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2004 12:09 PM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] ResourceFileSet
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ian MacLean" <ianm@...>
> To: "Gert Driesen" <gert.driesen@...>
> Cc: "Nant-Developers (E-Mail)" <nant-developers@...>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 10:16 AM
> Subject: Re: [nant-dev] ResourceFileSet
>> Gert Driesen wrote:
>> >----- Original Message -----
>> >From: "Ian MacLean" <ianm@...>
>> >To: "Gert Driesen" <gert.driesen@...>
>> >Cc: "Nant-Developers (E-Mail)" <nant-developers@...>
>> >Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2004 7:08 AM
>> >Subject: Re: [nant-dev] ResourceFileSet
>> >>First off sorry for top-posting but this thread is getting too long to
>> >>reply inline. I agree that having a profusion of resource related
>> >>elements isn't a good thing so lets go with the augmented fileset
>> >>than a dedicated <namedresources> element.
>> >We might have one more option : add an <embeddedresources> element,
>> >supports a nested fileset and a nested array of <resource> element,
>> >something like this :
>> > <embeddedresources>
>> > <files basedir="..."> (not sure about the <files> name though)
>> > <include name="..." />
>> > <include name="..." />
>> > </files>
>> > <resource file=".." name=" " /> (files name would be relative
>> > to
>> >project base directory)
>> > <resource file=".." name=" " />
>> > </embeddedresources>
>> >I do think its less confusing, but it is ofcourse (a lot) more verbose
>> >Not sure I really like it myself ...
>> yeah - its a bit too verbose for my liking and not necessarily any less
> No, I think I agree ...
>> >What will we do with the accessibility modifier that can be specified
>> >resources files in .NET 2.0 ? Should we add a "accessibility" (any
>> >name for this ?) attribute to the (Resource/ResX/Whatever)FileSet (we
>> >have one on the individual include elements, that's for sure) and to the
>> ><resource> element ? Guess so, right ?
>> I guess so. I don't know what the accessibility modifier does. I should
>> go check it I suppose.
> Need to check it myself ;-) We also need to have a look at the impact of
> the fact that resgen now supports creating "strong named resource classes"
> (or something like that), which is used a lot by VS.NET.
>> > but if we
>> >still to the "old" plan then we could just rename the current
>> >ResourceFileSet to ResXFileSet (although it handles more than just resx
>> >files) and use that for the compiler tasks, and add a new
>> >for the al task, right ?
>> Yeah that sounds fine.
> ok, but I guess we first need to have a look at the new /str resgen option
> (see above), and see how we can support that.
>> >>resgen will change to using a regular fileset instead of a
>> >>ResourceFileSet. Incidentally why does it use ResourceFileSet now ? Is
>> >>it just for easier assignment from the compiler tasks ?
>> >Its not easier at all, so I really have no clue ...
>> hmm - pretty sure I wrote at least some of that code and I have no idea
>> either. Well - if we don't need the ResourceFileset there then lets
>> change it to FileSet.
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by BEA Weblogic Workshop
> FREE Java Enterprise J2EE developer tools!
> Get your free copy of BEA WebLogic Workshop 8.1 today.
> nant-developers mailing list