On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Rob Richardson <erobrich@...> wrote:
> Towards #net_4, I'd like to see an official download package for each runtime we target. E.g. one download for .net 1 (the one we have now ... until we kill it off), .net 2, .net 4, mono vX, mono vY, etc -- e.g. a download per #define tag. Right now the only way to get a #net_4 runtime version is to download source and compile. That isn't too bad except I have to dig up a VM that still has / I don't mind installing CVS onto. (Referencing the previous git / github +1. :D)
Ahhh, I see. That has been discussed in the past. I personally do
not have a problem with this setup (others might, IIRC) but we would
probably have to figure out a smart approach to this. On top of
figuring out whether or not official installers should be built (using
something like msi or NSIS).
> With git / github, check out http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=27967861 and https://github.com/skolima/NAnt. It'd be very, very nice if it was official. rather than cron-cloned.
That would be the plan. I would like to keep the current cvs around
as a readonly history repo while all of the upcoming changes go into
whatever system is decided upon. So no cron-cloned, just straight in.
> What is still needed with the <msbuild> task? I'd like to see more built-in parameters instead of resulting to <arg /> but at the end of the day, it gets it done.
Unfortunately, I need to dive in and see. I am basing my response on
past conversations I have had with other team members.
> I'd love to help in any way I can. I've got a nice library I'd love to share that implements Ant's <parallel> and <restrict> tasks. I've also got tasks that list projects given a solution, list project content given a project (to facilitate deploying a website), runs a sql command given a connection string or an app/web.config and (optionally) connection name using SqlClient instead of ODBC, and a few other goodies and tricks. +1 for <xmllist> as well, though I didn't write it. If any of these can get into the official trunk for NAnt or Contrib, all the better.
Those sound like goodies that would be cool to have.
> I grant in the near-term you probably need more help in existing tasks than in new ones, and I'm ok with that too. What're the open issues / tasks? Which would you like me to take on first?
Well, that's the beauty of working on an open source project. Work on
what you want to work on. We have items that we wish to work on that
may not reflect what you consider high priorities. Send in what you
have and we can see where they would fit in.
Like I have said before, we probably need to update our contribution
instructions pretty soon after the repo decision is made.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ryan Boggs <rmboggs@...>
> To: Rob Richardson <erobrich@...>
> Cc: "nant-developers@..." <nant-developers@...>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 12:35 PM
> Subject: Re: [nant-dev] Next NAnt/NAntContrib TODO Tasks
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Rob Richardson <erobrich@...> wrote:
>> I'll avoid the >athon and just reply at the top.
>> +1 on git and github. That's more-or-less the lingua franca of open-source now-a-days. Being able to accept pull
>> requests would be awesome! Once it's
>> there, I've got a heap ton of pull requests I'd love to hand off. To that end, we should consider a <git>
>> task in NAnt, and consider moving <cvs> to NAntContrib.
> Nice, another plus 1.
> My thinking was to move both NAnt/NAntContrib to a non-CVS repo at the
> same time. Hopefully, this process will bring the projects closer
> together in scope so we don't have a lag on one side or another.
>> I'd like to see <nunit2>
>> either get to 2.5.10 or spun off as a separate project. I had to resort to <exec> to get 2.5.10
>> working as well. Many SF patches / posts
>> have upgraded the task throughout the years, but it's never gotten pulled into the trunk. If NAnt's cadence is going to be anywhere
>> near previous precedent, <nunit2> has to move separately to remain relevant.
> My goal is to get it to the latest version, which is 2.5.10 I believe.
> Like I stated in a previous email today, I couldn't get to it during
> 0.91 development because of the amount of effort needed to update NAnt
> to use the new NUnit API.
>> I'd like to also throw in my
>> vote to get <msbuild> moved from NAntContrib to NAnt. The <solution> task hasn't worked for
>> me in 5 years, and thus <msbuild> has really become an essential part of
>> NAnt. (Towards the goals of NAnt 2.5, we could shim <solution> to use <msbuild> for VS 2005+ projects/solutions.) Tangentially related, if we used the
>> <msbuild> task to build NAnt, we could easily get "Any CPU"
>> mode -- a result not currently available in the NAnt release package.
> IIRC, the <msbuild> task needs some more effort before being ported
> over. I know there was work done around VS.NET/msbuild during the
> 0.91 release cycle but I am not sure how much of that effort related
> to the NAntContrib <msbuild> task.
> I was planning on approaching this now anyway. One of the things I
> would like to work on is some kind of sandcastle task for doc building
> but it would probably have to rely on that <msbuild> task.
>> +1 on moving to .net 2 and
>> generics, and a standard #define net_4 release would also be awesome.
> I thought we had the net_4.0 preprocessing tag in NAnt already, unless
> I am misunderstanding you here.
>> How can I help?
> Love the enthusiasm! :) Speak up and be heard. I try to read these
> messages as much as I can so any input/advice/suggestions you or
> anyone else may have, please chime in. We welcome it. :)
> I'm hoping to get a more up-to-date contribution guide going once we
> make a decision on the cvs repo situation. I'll post it once we get
> there. :)
>> The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
>> demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
>> Take a complimentary Learning@... Self-Assessment and learn
>> about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities.
>> nant-developers mailing list