What do you prefer? What's the most usable name, release.cmd or buildsimple.cmd or go.cmd?
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 4:38 PM, Tim Barcz <[email protected]> wrote: > Updating now. > > Why "enduser.cmd"? just curious. IMO it's not the most obvious...(I fully > admit that there is "How to Build" but again, usability, usability, > usability. Most programs/websites have help sections that are RARELY used. > > > On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Roelof Blom <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Tim, >> >> Can you update to the latest trunk and run enduser.cmd? >> >> -- Roelof. >> >> >> On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Tim Barcz <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Markus, >>> >>> That would make more sense... >>> >>> I'm just suggesting to reduce friction. It's a usability thing, if >>> average users struggle to build, you should do what it takes to capture the >>> average user. I, you, people on this list, can build without much issue >>> because we're used to the oss world. >>> >>> Just like you would on an application, make it "usable" >>> >>> Tim >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Markus Zywitza < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> But perhaps we should change release.cmd to call build.cmd quick release >>>> clean build. >>>> >>>> -Markus >>>> >>>> 2009/3/27 Roelof Blom <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> Hi Tim, >>>>> >>>>> It *is* fixed, but running some random build script without reading >>>>> 'How to build.txt' will get you into trouble, like kzu demonstrated by >>>>> twittering. >>>>> >>>>> Like I wrote earlier, run the new *build.cmd* script, for instance >>>>> 'build.cmd quick build'. >>>>> >>>>> Please let me know it this works for you. >>>>> >>>>> -- Roelof. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Tim Barcz <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I'm not sure where things stand but I STILL cannot build when pulling >>>>>> directly from source. I am not the only one either, this is last night >>>>>> on >>>>>> twitter. >>>>>> >>>>>> http://m.twitter.com/kzu/status/1399399001: >>>>>> >>>>>> get castle trunk, run included release.cmd => "'nant' is not >>>>>>> recognized blah blah...". #FAIL >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Can we get this fixed ASAP? I don't understand why we can't reduce >>>>>> the friction for building. >>>>>> >>>>>> Tim >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 7:46 AM, Roelof Blom >>>>>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No, I committed my local stuff. But thanks for the patch, it >>>>>>> triggered me to commit this stuff. Run the new build.cmd script to use >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> embedded NAnt and NUnit. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- Roelof. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Tim Barcz <[email protected]>wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Isn't this what I committed? Has the patch been applied? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Roelof Blom <[email protected] >>>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I have a version that has NAnt and NUnit embedded and has a simple >>>>>>>>> batch file (build.cmd) to drive the build. Any objections to >>>>>>>>> committing it? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>> Roelof. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 9:08 PM, Matt Robinson < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> +1 then -- >>>>>>>>>> if you'd like some testing help let me know. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> matt >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Feb 11, 2009, at 12:03 PM, Tim Barcz wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Basically what'd I'd do is bring in nant and any external >>>>>>>>>> libraries that are needed (nunit is another one I can think of) and >>>>>>>>>> provide >>>>>>>>>> batch files for the most common scenarios. The idea would be to >>>>>>>>>> non-invasive on the build file itself, that's I'd like to leave >>>>>>>>>> alone for >>>>>>>>>> the reasons you pointed out. I only want to reduce friction around >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> current build file/process. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Tim >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Matt Robinson < >>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> what files in the current build setup would this affect? the >>>>>>>>>>> nature of the castle .build files makes it easy to do complicated >>>>>>>>>>> things >>>>>>>>>>> (castle dynproxy -> nhibernate -> rhino tools / full castle -> your >>>>>>>>>>> in-house >>>>>>>>>>> code), so I'd only be worried if this would somehow remove the >>>>>>>>>>> current >>>>>>>>>>> "hookability", if that makes any sense? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 11, 2009, at 11:27 AM, Tim Barcz wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I am more than willing to get this up and running for major areas >>>>>>>>>>> of the build if you all will let me. I have this on our build here >>>>>>>>>>> at work >>>>>>>>>>> where everything is referenced relatively. The goal is that the >>>>>>>>>>> users/developers should be able to get source and get up and >>>>>>>>>>> running very >>>>>>>>>>> very quickly. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Despite how this sounds, I see this as being very non-invasive >>>>>>>>>>> and quick to do. I'd love to contribute if you guys approve this. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Tim >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:32 PM, Julian Birch < >>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Consider this a +1. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I actually wrote a program to do this, I got so bored with all >>>>>>>>>>>> of the various bits you need to get/know. Keep meaning to turn it >>>>>>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>>>>>> something someone else could use. It downloads Nant, Nunit and >>>>>>>>>>>> the rest. >>>>>>>>>>>> Julian. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2009/2/11 Daniel Hölbling <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I'd really love to see that since I have failed miserably to >>>>>>>>>>>>> compile Castle from source last week. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Some way to easily compile the source would be great. >>>>>>>>>>>>> (Especially since I often hop machines and keeping all build >>>>>>>>>>>>> tools in sync >>>>>>>>>>>>> is quite challenging) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Greetings, Daniel >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 6:16 PM, Bill Barry < >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> hink there should be a text file there containing instructions >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get the Nant sour >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Development List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
