+1 to build.cmd "bleh" to b.cmd On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Roelof Blom <[email protected]> wrote:
> I like the 'You need to edit...' thing. > > How about build.cmd for end users and b.cmd for people who know what > they're doing? > > > On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Julian Birch <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Well, the "end user" user friendly thing is to probably have "DoBuild" for >> beginners, and "DoBuildAdvanced" for people who know what they're doing. >> And make DoBuildAdvanced start with >> echo "You need to edit this file before it will work." >> exit >> >> Oh yes, and +1. >> >> Julian. >> >> >> 2009/3/27 Roelof Blom <[email protected]> >> >>> 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
