Do you use this for local builds or only on ci? On 25 Apr 2011 17:21, "Kelly Leahy" <[email protected]> wrote: > It might be worth looking at psake (https://github.com/JamesKovacs/psake). > These days it's pretty hard to find people that don't have powershell > installed, and it's pretty easy to get to the "minimum bar" for psake (i.e. > understand how to do most things you need). It has a similar philosophy to > rake, but is much better for .NET projects than rake/ruby (IMHO that is). > > Wev'e been using it for our projects for a while now and very much like it, > once we got a bit over the hump on how to do powershell stuff. > > We use it to: > 1) compile/build our projects, > 2) deploy to azure > 3) manage cleanup of azure storage > 4) deploy to local servers > 5) run tests > 6) invoke selenium + IIS and run our web integration tests > > plus several other "automation" tasks that we use for day-to-day > development. > > So far, we haven't had a problem that we couldn't solve with it, and have > never needed to build "custom code" for it, except in those cases where > doing something in Powershell was just not the best solution (so we built a > command line 'devtool' that does much of the work, similar to svcutil.exe > from MS or other similar tools). > > Just my $0.02 > > Kelly > > 2011/4/25 Henry Conceição <[email protected]> > >> Hi Henrik, >> >> I'm not reluctant to give you access. As I did explain to you, only >> committers have access to the Castle's git, teamcity and stuff. You >> can see this as bureaucracy, but having this more hardened policies >> protects the project from fly by night contributors and privileges >> meritocracy. >> >> Cheers, >> Henry Conceição >> >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Henrik <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I have worked a lot with MSBuild in my professional projects and I >> > have the firm opinion that XML is not a programming language, and >> > should hence not be used like it is. By saying that exec is the way >> > out of the mess is to completely discard any remaining credibility of >> > the build tool. >> > >> > Build tools do dirty-checking, cleaning, clobbering, dependency >> > checking, parallelization, status tracking and much more. MSBuild is >> > in my opinion too verbose and hard to use -- and this is after >> > spending a lot of time with it and knowing its ins and outs. >> > >> > Rake/Ruby is extensible at its core and has a lot of momentum in the >> > remaining ALT.Net circles. >> > >> > The way I have set up the build scripts; if you read the code; is in a >> > way that makes it possible to have team-city recognize and do all the >> > things you mention. I have experience with TeamCity and rake from >> > other projects as well and I have asked Henry to get access so that I >> > can set it up, but he's reluctant to give me any rights to solve the >> > problem. >> > >> > >> > On Apr 25, 12:13 pm, Krzysztof Koźmic <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> >> I haven't looked beyond putting Nuget package for Windsor 2.5.3 out, >> >> something that was frequently requested. >> >> >> >> I would *love* to have the release process automated (to a point where I >> >> git push to a new tag and our TeamCity recognizes that, and runs a >> >> release build that does everything, including release packaging, >> >> releasing to SF, nuget and OW, branching (if new branch is needed, that >> >> is it's not a point point release and few other things I forgot, like >> >> updating the website in all 3 places.)) >> >> >> >> I *strongly* prefer giving MsBuild a fair shot before trying any other >> >> build solution, mostly because MsBuild is out of the box, it's .NET and >> >> many developers will flat refuse to install Ruby in order to build a >> >> .NET project. >> >> >> >> I think the scripts we have are really well and cleanly written and >> >> while I'm nowhere near as proficient at working with them as Roelof is, >> >> I've been able to tweak them on several occasions, same as I'm sure >> >> everyone else on the team would be. >> >> >> >> This however reminds me of another problem I've had, and we'll continue >> >> having, that is keeping consistency in build scripts among projects. >> >> I've mostly worked with Core and Windsor and all changes and tweaks >> >> introduced in one project had to be manually copied to the other one. As >> >> we have many more projects I'm sure trying to deploy changes to build >> >> process all across the board would be nothing short of a nightmare. >> >> >> >> Can we please consider some options for automated sharing the build >> >> files among all of our projects so that we only change things once and >> >> that change gets propagated to every project? >> >> >> >> I think it might also be beneficial to have a wiki page that >> >> a) documents how our build works and how it should be used >> >> b) documents customizations we've made to .csproj files so that it's >> >> easy to add a new project and get it to work with the build >> >> >> >> Krzysztof >> >> >> >> On 25/04/2011 7:49 PM, John Simons wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > I would much rather use rake then msbulid. >> >> > No offence to Roelof but currently I think the only person that can >> >> > maintain those scripts is him and I don't believe this is a good >> >> > situation. I think Krzysztof is trying to hook up nuget and ow to our >> >> > build + automate most of it, how is that going? Is msbuild working for >> >> > this? >> >> >> >> > Cheers, John >> >> >> >> > On 25/04/2011, at 5:36, Henry Conceição <[email protected] >> >> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> About the build: I don't like the ideia of obligating everyone to >> have >> >> >> ruby + rake in order to build the tx stuff. Probably we will restore >> >> >> the msbuild and get rid of the rake scripts when we merge the changes >> >> >> on the master repo. >> >> >> >> >> On the 3.5 matter: At least for me, we can drop de support for it. >> >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> Henry Conceição >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Henrik Feldt <[email protected] >> >> >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> >>> Yup, a merge it is. They are merged in my repository now. >> >> >> >> >>> The rest in this letter is about the upcoming alpha. >> >> >> >> >>> Docs: >> >> >> >> >>> I have added docs to the wiki as well on my repo. >> >> >> >> >>> Building: >> >> >> >> >>> Both projects have been rewritten, based on the previous ideas. This >> >> >>> includes using rake for the build – using it makes me about 10 times >> as >> >> >>> productive when writing the scripts. >> >> >> >> >>> Versioning: >> >> >> >> >>> In the rake scripts I have set up build-number versioning like that >> >> >>> NHibernate uses, so that >> >> >> >> >>> 100x is alpha >> >> >> >> >>> 200x is beta >> >> >> >> >>> 300x is rc >> >> >> >> >>> 4000 is ga. >> >> >> >> >>> So e.g., currently I’m building 2.9.9.11215 at 3 pm, or 2.9.9.1001 >> >> >>> for the >> >> >>> first alpha. >> >> >> >> >>> The versioning for private builds uses the day of the year and the >> >> >>> hour as >> >> >>> the build number. >> >> >> >> >>> Sadly: >> >> >> >> >>> Right now I’m just working against .Net v4.0. There’s no real >> problem >> >> >>> re-targeting 3.5. >> >> >> >> >>> Code contracts: >> >> >> >> >>> I’ve done both with MS code contracts for good or bad, but only >> >> >>> debug builds >> >> >>> have the contracts. In my opinion it’s nice for showing intent >> around >> >> >>> interfaces. The most prominently used part is that of the static >> >> >>> verification, the part which doesn’t compile into the assembly. I >> >> >>> believe >> >> >>> they work very well with unit tests as well, as one only tests >> allowed >> >> >>> functionality as opposed to disallowed functionality that throws >> >> >>> exception. >> >> >> >> >>> People use the debug build with contract assertions or the release >> build >> >> >>> without any alterations. >> >> >> >> >>> Alpha TODO: >> >> >> >> >>> Finish build script for building nuspecs with lib and tools. Perhaps >> a >> >> >>> transform file for adding AutoTx and the new NHibernate Facility to >> >> >>> a web >> >> >>> site. Test this out and release 2.9.9 (perhaps). Set up a build >> >> >>> server for >> >> >>> the new rake scripts. Does castle have one that I can use for >> testing – >> >> >>> TeamCity? I can create its configs. >> >> >> >> >>> Release 3.0 TODO File Transactions: >> >> >> >> >>> I’m aiming to spend a few hours on the file transactions before >> >> >>> release to >> >> >>> fully integrate it with ITxManager, but the non-file transaction >> >> >>> parts seem >> >> >>> OK. >> >> >> >> >>> Release 3.0 TODO Forking: >> >> >> >> >>> There is also a bit of problems related to continuation passing when >> >> >>> forking >> >> >>> dependent transactions through the new [Transaction(Fork=true)] >> >> >>> functionality as tasks are awaited on the finalizer thread if >> >> >>> exceptions are >> >> >>> not observed on the main thread. >> >> >> >> >>> Release 3.1 TODO Retry policies etc: >> >> >> >> >>> This idea is something I’d like to investigate: possibly retrying >> failed >> >> >>> transactions through the transaction interceptor. Also, creating a >> >> >>> IHandlerSelector for choosing transient lifestyle components if in >> no >> >> >>> ambient transaction. >> >> >> >> >>> Cheers >> >> >> >> >>> Henrik >> >> >> >> >>> From: [email protected] >> >> >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >> >> >>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >> >> >>> Krzysztof Kozmic >> >> >>> Sent: den 15 november 2010 02:30 >> >> >>> To: [email protected] >> >> >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >> >> >>> Subject: Re: Castle.Services.Transaction + Castle.Windsor? >> >> >> >> >>> Henrik, >> >> >> >> >>> What's the status of this? Did you go ahead with the merge? Do you >> still >> >> >>> plan to? >> >> >> >> >>> From another department - would you care to have a look at the >> >> >>> documentation >> >> >>> and expand it to fully cover all functionality of the facility? >> >> >>>http://stw.castleproject.org/Windsor.ATM-Facility.ashx >> >> >> >> >>> Krzysztof >> >> >> >> >>> On 23/09/2010 8:52 PM, Henrik Feldt wrote: >> >> >> >> >>> Hello everyone, >> >> >> >> >>> I’m considering merging the code of Castle.Services.Transaction with >> >> >>> Castle.Facilities.AutomaticTransactionManagement/AutoTX. This would >> >> >>> introduce a dependency on Castle.Windsor for >> >> >>> Castle.Services.Transaction. >> >> >>> (Another way of saying it is that the IoC-container would be >> >> >>> required for >> >> >>> using the transactions project, which it is not now. However, it >> could >> >> >>> simplify versioning/dll-management slightly). >> >> >> >> >>> As of now it is merely a thought: please tell me what your opinions >> >> >>> are on >> >> >>> whether to merge them or not! >> >> >> >> >>> Kind regards, >> >> >> >> >>> Henrik >> >> >> >> >>> -- >> >> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> >> >>> Groups >> >> >>> "Castle Project Users" group. >> >> >>> To post to this group, send email to >> >> >>> [email protected] >> >> >>> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> >> >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> >> >>> [email protected] >> >> >>> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> >> >>> For more options, visit this group at >> >> >>>http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en. >> >> >> >> >>> -- >> >> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> >> >>> Groups >> >> >>> "Castle Project Users" group. >> >> >>> To post to this group, send email to >> >> >>> [email protected] >> >> >>> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> >> >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> >> >>> [email protected] >> >> >>> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> >> >>> For more options, visit this group at >> >> >>>http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?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] >> >> >>> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> >> >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> >> >>> [email protected] >> >> >>> <mailto:[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] >> >> >> <mailto:[email protected]>. >> >> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> >> >> [email protected] >> >> >> <mailto:[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. >> > >> > -- >> > 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. >> >> > > -- > 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.
