Still migrating myself some projects with hundreds of csprojs+vcprojs, from nant to msbuild, my conclusions so far are:
1) unless you can live with "monster" solution files (and being really/really slow to load those) that build all the VS projects, (I couldn't) you may instead need to have a slim master solution, with just a fake csproj that recurse through the solutions that already exist, and lose any niceties VS presents for project types it natively knows. I didn't check if VS2010, have improved the situation. 2) in the other side, it is really quite simple to tweak build files (csproj) to do many other steps, currently done on the Nant. The problem is getting used to the non-sequentially-imperative model it exposes (as it tries to solve dependencies as automatically as possible). 3) Even creating custom tasks is quite easy and can make the build files a lot more concise and understandable. So I'm +1 for MSBuild PS.: To avoid multiple rebuilds of partial projects referenced many times, the only formula I could find IS to have the Monster Solution, but just to use it via msbuild that loads it and builds its a lot faster than VS. The only problem I could not solve it to call VS (devenv.exe) in recursive fashion to build sub-solutions that contain some vcprojs (native C), as those aren't well supported by msbuild up to VS2008/msbuild 3.5. my two cents Rafael "Monoman" Teixeira --------------------------------------- "To be creative means to be in love with life. You can be creative only if you love life enough that you want to enhance its beauty, you want to bring a little more music to it, a little more poetry to it, a little more dance to it." Osho On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 9:08 PM, John Simons <[email protected]> wrote: > Fixed Core, DP and IOC, these should now be able to be opened and > built in VS. > > On Dec 21, 10:19 pm, Roelof Blom <[email protected]> wrote: >> Inline >> >> On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 11:52 AM, John Simons >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >> > Roelof initial post was about replacing nant with msbuild, now we have >> > suggestions to use psake, rake, ironruby, phantom, my question is why. >> > What is wrong with nant? It seems to be doing the job, or am I missing >> > something? >> >> > I know it is not perfect, and is not a dsl or no xml, but it does the >> > job. >> >> > >sln/csproj (references and sources) are 'automatically' in sync with >> > > what's on the disk, >> > Yes that is true, but does it really take that long to keep them in >> > sync? And in my case I use VS to do updates to the source code so >> > everything is in sync anyway. >> >> It's not hard, it's just friction. >> One more drawback of the current build system is that it picks up every .cs >> file. >> By using .csproj you can more easily partition the build for .NET and >> Silverlight, >> by creating a .csproj for the platform you want to build on. >> >> >> >> > > just open a sln and it compiles without running NAnt first(we create a >> > > little exe that creates/updates AssemblyInfo on the PreBuildEvent). >> > Most of the projects if not all are now able to be opened from VS and >> > built by pressing F5 without having to run any prior nant scripts, if >> > you know of any project that is broken please either fix it or let us >> > know and I'll fix it. >> >> Just did a fresh checkout of DP, opened the sln and it did not compile >> because AssemblyInfo.cs is missing. >> Same goes for IOC, and I suspect the same is true for all other projects. >> >> > I do like the idea of being able to build everything with msbuild. >> > I do think it is reasonable to assume that 90% of our user base is >> > using VS and they much rather build our projects from inside VS than >> > any other way. >> >> And I like to extend this to the command line. >> >> >> >> > All the build solutions that have been mentioned so far sound pretty >> > good, but what is the benefit to the end user? Any solution that is >> > not double click the sln file and press F5, in my opinion is not worth >> > the effort. >> >> Exactly. >> >> >> >> > Cheers >> > John > > -- > > 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.
