Hi you're totally correct in the near future we'll have to see how we'll handle windows 2012 :-)
with kind regards Ruben Willems On 1 September 2012 02:45, Katherine Moss <[email protected]> wrote: > Well that make ssense. I’m just trying to ensure that CCNet will run on > something like Windows Server 2012 since 2012 installs .net framework 4.5 > by default, and no longer includes version 3.5 during install. Correct me > if I am mistaken though. **** > > ** ** > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On > Behalf Of *Ruben Willems > *Sent:* Friday, August 31, 2012 3:47 PM > > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [ccnet-user] Support .NET framework**** > > ** ** > > Hi > > > I think you're mixing a few things : > Not moving to .Net 4.0 / 4.5 has nothing to do with security. I doubt that > .Net 4.0 is more secure than .Net 3.5 > Nothing is preventing any user to update his/her .Net 3.5 with the latest > patches / fixes > --> updating .Net is not the same as keeping your OS up to date > > .Net 3.5 runs on winXP through win7 (win8?) > > > And when CCNet requires .Net 3.5 to run, it can perfectly build projects > that run in .Net 2.0 / 4.0 /4.5 > > We're just not pushing our users to the latest framework whenever a new > one comes out. > Off course there will be a time that we'll move to .Net 4.0 / 4.5 / 5.0 , > even if we do not use anything specific of that version > --> Just to prevent that the majority of our users have to install an old > .Net framework on their build server, just to be able to build their > projects. > > It *could *be that CCNet 1.9 will eventually be released in .Net 4.0, but > nothing stops us from still releasing 1.8 releases on the .Net 3.5 > > This way people who can not upgrade right away can still get fixes / new > features as long as they are compatible to 1.8 > People who can upgrade and only have the latest framework can use the > latest version of CCNet. > But the exact solution we'll have to see, my crystal boll just broke > > > > > with kind regards > Ruben Willems**** > > On 31 August 2012 21:24, Katherine Moss <[email protected]> > wrote:**** > > I guess I tend to say that because I'm a very enthusiastic tech, and so I > always like to have the latest stuff to play with. My mentors teach me to > be the same way here at my college, so I guess I was just brought up on the > cutting edge. But another reason why I tend to make updates mandatory in > my setups is because I feel much more secure on the latest Operating > system; more malware propagates to XP than to 7, so why not use the one > that is more secure?**** > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Andy Levy > Sent: Friday, August 31, 2012 9:09 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ccnet-user] Support .NET framework > > On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 8:15 AM, Ruben Willems <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi > > > > Because that would require all the users of CCNet to update their > > buildserver just to be able to run CCNet. > > There are many companies where such an update is not that easily done, > > I worked for one of them. > > > > It takes a lot of paperwork and time and effort to get this done, and > > since CCNet will not use any of the new features, why make an upgrade > > mandatory? > > > > > > We still do not even use anything of .Net 4.0 specific :-) an upgrade > > from .NEt 1.1 to 2.0 was neat : generics from .Net 2.0 to 3.5 : > > Linq, anonymous types, lambda's, ... > > > > .Net 4 also has some neat features, but we do not require them for the > > moment > > Thank you for this. I can see how some people might want to force the > latest version to try out all the "hot, new features" of the Framework, but > if there isn't a compelling reason to actually *use* them, why force it? > CCNet isn't a "fun project" to many of us regular users - it's a piece of > business-critical operational software, and that means we can't just push a > system update out into our environment on a whim. > > > > > On 31 August 2012 13:31, Katherine Moss <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> I don't know specifics, I just see no reason not to require the > >> highest .net framework version. What's wrong with requiring .NET > >> framework 4.5 because it's the most current? > >> > >> > >> > >> From: [email protected] > >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ruben Willems > >> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2012 3:17 AM > >> > >> > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: [ccnet-user] Support .NET framework > >> > >> > >> > >> Hi > >> > >> What things in 4.5 would be great for CCNet (buildserver / dashboard > >> / > >> cctray) ? > >> I've got no clue for the moment > >> > >> > >> with kind regards > >> Ruben Willems > >> > >> On 31 August 2012 01:34, Katherine Moss <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> I think it a discussion that should be had then. > >> > >> > >> > >> From: [email protected] > >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steve Celius > >> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 3:53 PM > >> > >> > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: [ccnet-user] Support .NET framework > >> > >> > >> > >> For CCNet, it is not about supporting the latest technology, you can > >> configure your builds to make 4.5 stuff if you'd like to. > >> > >> It is about keeping the requirements for running the thing down, > >> which is a good thing. Of course, there might be stuff in 4.0 and > >> later that would ease development for the brave core-team, but that > >> is another discussion I think. > >> > >> /Steve > >> > >> Katherine Moss > >> > >> 30. august 2012 21:48 > >> > >> Woe? No support for .net 4.0? You guys are missing out; think of > >> version > >> 4.5 as well. What are you thinking; why not always support the > >> latest technology? > >> > >> > >> > >> From: [email protected] > >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of stevec > >> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 9:36 AM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: [ccnet-user] Support .NET framework > >> > >> > >> > >> Ok...good. That means I can continue to run XP on our CI box for a > while. > >> Thanks for the info, Ruben. > >> > >> Steve > >> > >> On Thursday, August 30, 2012 5:13:50 AM UTC-4, Ruben Willems wrote: > >> > >> Hi > >> > >> For the moment there are no plans for a move to .Net 4 if that is > >> what you mean the current version 1.8 is at framework 3.5 > >> > >> with kind regards > >> Ruben Willems > >> > >> On 29 August 2012 19:38, Stephan Clark <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> A quick question: I've got a CC-Net build server running on XP Pro. > >> Will that OS continue to be able to run CC-Net for the foreseeable > >> future (12-18 months)? > >> > >> > >> > >> Steve Clark > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Ruben Willems > >> > >> 30. august 2012 11:13 > >> > >> Hi > >> > >> For the moment there are no plans for a move to .Net 4 if that is > >> what you mean the current version 1.8 is at framework 3.5 > >> > >> with kind regards > >> Ruben Willems > >> > >> > > > > > > **** > > ** ** >
<<image001.gif>>
