This discussion is definitely helping... I posted to the users list, rather than the dev list, because the users are the ones who will be installing the msi. For the most part, developers will be doing like you do, John, and pulling a nightly build from CVS. So if any [new?] users have any opinions on this, I would like to hear those, too.
If I were new to NAnt these points would be important to me: * I would want NAnt and any other companion projects (NAntContrib) to be accessible without much pain. That is, clearly link to the main project download site and any subproject. (NAntContrib, NAntPad, etc). * If NAnt and NAntContrib are both separate installs, if I choose to install NAntContrib, it must check to see if NAnt is installed, first. Otherwise do not install... * The NAntContrib install would allow an option add itself to NAnt (via the config file or dumping the files into the bin directory, etc) so that the tasks do not have to be explicitly loaded for each build file. As a side note, I think that the link to the sf.net Files section is done well on the website. Links to other projects (NAntContrib, NAntPad, etc) could be done better, IMO... I do agree with John that having two separate msi installs for NAnt and NAntContrib could cause problems with support, but maybe that's just something we deal with... For example, if a user has NAnt 0.85 installed and later decides to install NAntContrib 0.90, there could be problems. For the future, I think it would be cool if the install allowed the user to specify if they wanted NAnt integrated into VS.Net. By that, I mean have the install detect VS.Net 2002 & 2003. If it finds one or both, allow the user to specify if they want: * To associate .build files w/ Vs.Net. * Add the schema to allow intellisense. Just some more thoughts... JIm On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 08:53:48 -0600, John Cole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ahhh... Ok, that's fine. I was worried that I was doing something wrong :-) > > I'll make one last comment on the MSI issue; if someone is going to be using > a MSI to install NAnt, odds are, they aren't going to care much about it > being one separate product or two, or where/how it's installed on their > computer. A user installing by MSI will care about selecting the features > that contain everything they are going to use and they will hope they never > have to dive into the NAnt or NAntContrib directories to fix/configure > anything. > > MSI users aren't going to try to upgrade NAnt without upgrading NAntContrib > or vise-versa. In fact most won't realize they are two products at all if > the typical install installs both. > > Now developers, that's a different story and anyone downloading and > compiling NAnt is going to understand the differences between the two and > will insist that they remain separate. Unix users, too, will want them to > be separate, but then they won't be using an MSI either. > > My *opinion* is that the MSI is good as is. It meets the targeted user's > expectations. And it simplifies support because you don't have to ask if > they are using a different version of NAntContrib vs NAnt. It also doesn't > make it hard to switch between the two installations if you want to. > > Now, you guys know a LOT more about NAnt that I ever will. I pull NAnt from > CVS and rebuild it regularly and I'm comfortable with that. But I have to > deploy NAnt internally here, and the MSI is the perfect tool for that. It's > a fantastic product (both of them) and there is just something right about > NAnt/NAntContrib being able to build its own installer :-) > > I hope the final decision of the MSI will keep NAnt/NAntContrib easy to use, > no matter how and where its installed. > > Thanks, > > John Cole > > -----Original Message----- > From: Gert Driesen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 8:27 AM > To: John Cole; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Nant-users] 0.85 msi install > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John Cole" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 3:21 PM > Subject: RE: [Nant-users] 0.85 msi install > > > Gert, > > What are your reasons for not copying NAntContrib into NAnt? It feels > > simple and safe, I was wondering why we shouldn't do that. > > I just like to consider them as two separate products, and copying all > binaries in one directory makes it less obvious which assembly is used / > needed by which "product". > > If we ever remove dependencies on certain assemblies for NAntContrib, these > will be left in the NAnt directory for eternety .... > > Everyone's free to do as they like ofcourse ... > > Gert > > ------------------------------------- > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended > solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If > you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This > message contains confidential information and is intended only for the > individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not > disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide > Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. > Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. > http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ > _______________________________________________ > Nant-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-users > ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ _______________________________________________ Nant-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-users
