Not really sure what you mean, but our current Prebuild should be able to merge solutions. I haven't done it, but from what I can see in the code, it should be possible.
So, you could create a Prebuild xml that #include the OpenSim prebuild.xml and the result is the output of a joint solution. Best regards, Stefan Andersson Tribal Media AB > From: mysticaldem...@xrgrid.com > To: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 07:30:39 -0400 > Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] C# 3.0 vs .Net 2 > > Is there a way we can add some extended solutions to OpenSim that are > platform specific. I am working in Visual Studio 2008 with .NET 3.5. Some > of my stuff I can share back with the community but not sure how to do that. > > So not to divert this thread but if there is not a strategy for how to do > this now seems like it would be good to have. > > Kevin Tweedy > IRC: Mystical > > -----Original Message----- > From: Teravus Ovares [mailto:tera...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 1:28 AM > To: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] C# 3.0 vs .Net 2 > > Our issue here isn't mono support :) Mono has 3.0 support since > 1.9.1. It's our support of Visual Studio 2005 as a build tool. > > Visual Studio 2005 is the tool that doesn't understand code in C# 3.0 :). > > Visual Studio 2008 will generate a 2.0 assembly from 3.0 code. > Visual Studio 2005 will fail to build. > > As far as I really know.. the only reason to support Visual Studio > 2005 right now is for people who have Visual Studio 2005 Standard, > Pro, or Team licenses. Visual Studio 2008 Express is freely > downloadable and available and Mono is quite happy with 3.0 syntax > > Sincerely > > Teravus > > On 3/26/09, Frisby, Adam <a...@deepthink.com.au> wrote: > > > > > > > > If we consider a shift to .NET 3, I'd like to also propose utilizing the > new > > Socket members that .NET 3 introduced - there is some in there for high > > performance ASync socketing which perform significantly better than > previous > > ones in the kinds of situations we employ. > > > > > > > > (As long as Mono 2.0.2 has those implemented of course - but it shouldn't > be > > hard for the, they could at least just make them a splint to the old > > methods) > > > > > > > > Adam > > > > > > > > > > > > From: opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de > > [mailto:opensim-dev-boun...@lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of > > Ruud Lathrop > > Sent: Wednesday, 25 March 2009 11:34 AM > > To: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > > Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] C# 3.0 vs .Net 2 > > > > > > > > > > Visual Studio 2005 is using .NET 2.0/C# 2, only with some extending can > you > > use some .NET 3/C# 3 features (WCF is the best known). > > > > It seems that Visual Studio 2008 is doing some tricks for you when you > have > > a .NET 2.0 project, but use .NET 3/3.5 syntax. Like this: > > > > public string Test { get; set; } > > > > Just works in a .NET 2.0 project, same with lambda, while it is .NET 3/ C# > 3 > > specs > > > > Ruud > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Teravus Ovares <tera...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > The problem with Lamda Expressions isn't compiling to IL 2.0.. it's > > compiling in Visual Studio 2005. Visual Studio 2005 will not compile > > Lamda Expressions at all. > > > > Regards > > > > Teravus > > > > > > > > On 3/25/09, Sean Dague <sda...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Stefan Andersson wrote: > > > > Yo. > > > >=20 > > > > =20 > > > >=20 > > > > Feeling a bit stupid here, but just realized that many C# 3.0 features > = > > > (lambda expressions and inferred types, for example) compiles just fine > t= > > > o the .Net 2 IL, so in practise, it can be used if the installed csc > supp= > > > orts it. > > > >=20 > > > > =20 > > > >=20 > > > > What I'm saying is that we can probably start using some C# 3.0 > feature= > > > s already even on mono (I guess) without moving from .Net 2.0. Question > i= > > > s, what features? > > > >=20 > > > >=20 > > > > Could any mono person have a look at what C# 3.0 constructs are > actuall= > > > y backwards compatible with .Net 2.0 on mono? > > > > > > One approach would be to make a new unit test that used some of those > > > features, then it would be easy for people to test with their > > > environment. I suspect mono 1.9.1 is still going to have issues, and we > > > haven't committed to dumping it yet (as that's what is shipping in the > > > latest stable release of Ubuntu, which a lot of people are using). > > > > > > The new Ubuntu release comes out in April with Mono 2.0.2, so we can > > > leave 1.9.1 behind in the near future. > > > > > > -Sean > > > > > > --=20 > > > Sean Dague / Neas Bade > > > sda...@gmail.com > > > http://dague.net > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Opensim-dev mailing list > > > Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > > > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Opensim-dev mailing list > > Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Opensim-dev mailing list > > Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Opensim-dev mailing list > Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
_______________________________________________ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev