Roelof well put, and I can't say I don't agree with most of what you said. With the nice advantage of MsBuild, being - it's part of .NET, my suggestion about considering alternatives was driven by concern, that XML based solutions are pretty heavyweight. That being said, the total effort to migrate, and then extend and maintain the build to MsBuild may be higher than for alternatives like Bake, or PSake.
I agree with Ken about PSake. I forgot for a moment that PowerShell is not standard part of just any box, and with quirks it brings, I'm now rather against using it. About Bake - I haven't used it, but knowing what Boo can do, it feels it could be pretty good choice actually. It's bin deployable, so we're still good for ClickToBuild solution. It's not maintained anymore - well -is that really a problem? So isn't NAnt AFAIC? PSake itself is like 200LOC. If it does provide what we need I'm good with using it. And we can always fork it. All in all, this might prove to be easier to work with than MsBuild, and all I want is for us to consider all viable options and to make an informed choice. cheers, Krzysztof On 2009-12-20 17:40, Roelof Blom wrote: > Hi, > > Before you all shoot off in different directions, I was just testing > the water. Seems it's pretty cold :-) But given all the replies it's a > pretty hot subject. > > I fail to see the clear advantages of introducing yet another build > system, even one being as elegant as psake. All our projects use > sln/csproj and it's easiest to build upon that with MSBuild, IMHO. I > agree that if we need scripting psake would be a very nice tool for it. > > About all the other fancy alternatives: what will they bring us, > besides being "not-XML", that NAnt doesn't? Isn't that just porting > the current scripts to another platform? > Rake IMO, is a pretty alien thing on .NET and all the scripts for .NET > that I've seen delegate building to MSBuild by simply shelling out. > Uncool. > Bake is dead. Ayende's not even using it for his own projects. > IronRuby based builders - ??? > > One of the key points is ClickToBuild (or DX as Krzysztof put it > nicely), so not requiring anything besides VS is something to strive for. > My objective was to simplify the current build, bringing everything to > one build technology. And that technology is MSBuild on .NET, like it > or not. > > -- Roelof. > > -- > > 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. -- 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.
