> > Clayton was wondering if we could use > Gump write a pre-defined include file [it does something
> similar when
> > it run Maven]. Does this idea have legs? Will it work for
> compiles and
> > tests?
>
> I don't think it would work for tests. Can you specify the
> path to nunit.core.dll
Bugs item #1023986, was opened at 2004-09-07 17:02
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=402868&aid=1023986&group_id=31650
Category: Tasks
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: Non
> I don't know exactly what you're trying to achieve with Gump, but IMO
things
> are much easier than you think if you fully utilize NAnt's potential.
Yeah, I think we need to step back and make that clear.
Gump is attempting to emulate a "rabid" OSS developer, perform the steps a
developer woul
I think we decided to just document this side-effect.
My memory fails me here ... But if that is what we decided, then I
guess we should indeed document it in both the filset doc and in the
release notes ..
Sounds fair.
The reason for keeping this was that it was more consistent with
patterns
I don't know exactly what you're trying to achieve with Gump, but IMO things
are much easier than you think if you fully utilize NAnt's potential.
Nant is quite a portable beast today. It can run on 4 platforms (mono-1.0,
net-1.0, net-1.1, net-2.0) and compile for some more (netcf-1.0 and sscli).
>From: "Alex Hildyard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 6:06 PM
>Is it possible to repeat an arbitrary set of tasks with a user-defined exit
condition? If not, could I propose this as a new task?
Might I ask exactly what you're trying to accomplish with this? That might
help
- Original Message -
From: "Troy Laurin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Alex Hildyard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] Looping constructs in NAnt
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I'm not sure why you suggest that cal
- Original Message -
From: "Matthew Mastracci" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Gert Driesen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Ian MacLean" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 7:57 PM
Subject: Re: fileset/directoryscanner hang
I think we decided to just document this side-effect.
My me
I've been following this dicussion from the sidelines, and one idea that has
occurred to me that may help, and should probably be addressed anyway, is
having Gump produce its own public/private key pair for signing strong names
for the assemblies. By using a separate key, you reduce the GAC proble
> The script would need to know which framework you intend to use. For
> the Bourne shell script this simply means something like
>
> #!/bin/sh
> mono bin/NAnt.exe
>
> (ignoring Rotor and DotGNU for now) but the Windows batch file is a
> different beast.
We could set a Gump parameter in the work
> > BTW: Ought we attempt to contribute metadata for the mini-nant up to
> > nant projects (including log4net, etc.) and see if we can get that
> > working from within Gump? I think that makes a good first goal.
>
> I don't understand that, sorry. Are you asking whether we should try
> log4net fi
On Tue, 7 Sep 2004, Adam R. B. Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think the answer is 'who decides what is the right approach', and
> I feel it is the NAnt team.
Yes, I agree. We may need to explain in more detail what we want to
do and why we want to do that with Gump, but we need the expertiz
All,
I think I led Clayton down a false path, by me not knowing that bin/NAnt.exe
was "mini NAnt". (Sorry Clayton, you kept saying bin/NAnt.exe and I was
clueless since (to me) that just seemed like a built NAnt, I didn't know it
was mini-NAnt pre-stored in CVS.) All ... I am struggling here 'cos
Alex Hildyard wrote:
Hi,
Is it possible to repeat an arbitrary set of tasks with a user-defined
exit condition? If not, could I propose this as a new task?
The "foreach" task lets you iterate over a certain set of prescribed
structures, but it would be nice to have something which simply prov
> > I suggest that you do it the simple way - compile the all your
> > apps/libraries to a single directory using it as both a target and a
> > reference source and forget the GAC at all.
>
> Will that work with Mono 1.0.1 installing NUnit 2.1.91 into the GAC as
> it does on my Mac? I guess it wil
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004, Jaroslaw Kowalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> See this article "Avoid DevPath" for info on why you should avoid
> DEVPATH
>
> http://blogs.msdn.com/suzcook/archive/2003/08/15/57238.aspx
Thanks again.
,
| It's not good for the dev. env., either - it makes it unnecessaril
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004, Adam R. B. Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1) A project can have an attribute of language="csharp" (and this is
> needed to generate lib path).
wouldn't we need a more generic "platform" or something like this.
Would the lib path treatment of a J# or Nemerle or whatever .NET
17 matches
Mail list logo
