----- Original Message ----- From: "Ian MacLean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Gert Driesen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Nant-Developers (E-Mail)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [nant-dev] ResourceFileSet
> Gert Driesen wrote: > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Ian MacLean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: "Gert Driesen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Cc: "Nant-Developers (E-Mail)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2004 7:08 AM > >Subject: Re: [nant-dev] ResourceFileSet > > > > > > > > > >>First off sorry for top-posting but this thread is getting too long to > >>reply inline. I agree that having a profusion of resource related > >>elements isn't a good thing so lets go with the augmented fileset rather > >>than a dedicated <namedresources> element. > >> > >> > > > >We might have one more option : add an <embeddedresources> element, which > >supports a nested fileset and a nested array of <resource> element, meaning > >something like this : > > > ><csc> > > <embeddedresources> > > <files basedir="..."> (not sure about the <files> name though) > > <include name="..." /> > > <include name="..." /> > > </files> > > <resource file=".." name=" " /> (files name would be relative to > >project base directory) > > <resource file=".." name=" " /> > > </embeddedresources> > ></csc> > > > >I do think its less confusing, but it is ofcourse (a lot) more verbose ... > >Not sure I really like it myself ... > > > > > yeah - its a bit too verbose for my liking and not necessarily any less > confusing. No, I think I agree ... > > >What will we do with the accessibility modifier that can be specified for > >resources files in .NET 2.0 ? Should we add a "accessibility" (any better > >name for this ?) attribute to the (Resource/ResX/Whatever)FileSet (we can't > >have one on the individual include elements, that's for sure) and to the > ><resource> element ? Guess so, right ? > > > > > > > I guess so. I don't know what the accessibility modifier does. I should > go check it I suppose. Need to check it myself ;-) We also need to have a look at the impact of the fact that resgen now supports creating "strong named resource classes" (or something like that), which is used a lot by VS.NET. > > > but if we > >still to the "old" plan then we could just rename the current > >ResourceFileSet to ResXFileSet (although it handles more than just resx > >files) and use that for the compiler tasks, and add a new ResourceFileSet > >for the al task, right ? > > > > > Yeah that sounds fine. ok, but I guess we first need to have a look at the new /str resgen option (see above), and see how we can support that. > >>resgen will change to using a regular fileset instead of a > >>ResourceFileSet. Incidentally why does it use ResourceFileSet now ? Is > >>it just for easier assignment from the compiler tasks ? > >> > >> > > > >Its not easier at all, so I really have no clue ... > > > > > > > hmm - pretty sure I wrote at least some of that code and I have no idea > either. Well - if we don't need the ResourceFileset there then lets > change it to FileSet. ok Gert ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by BEA Weblogic Workshop FREE Java Enterprise J2EE developer tools! Get your free copy of BEA WebLogic Workshop 8.1 today. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=4721&alloc_id=10040&op=click _______________________________________________ nant-developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers
