Comments on: Build Systems http://innovatian.com/2010/05/build-systems/ Tue, 20 Dec 2011 21:26:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: derickbailey http://innovatian.com/2010/05/build-systems/comment-page-1/#comment-42 derickbailey Tue, 11 May 2010 05:11:40 +0000 http://innovatian.com/?p=396#comment-42 ok, so i missed your point, then. :) d'oh! ok, so i missed your point, then. :) d'oh!

]]> By: innovatian http://innovatian.com/2010/05/build-systems/comment-page-1/#comment-40 innovatian Tue, 11 May 2010 04:16:03 +0000 http://innovatian.com/?p=396#comment-40 Thanks for the heads up, I will take a look. Thanks for the heads up, I will take a look.

]]> By: innovatian http://innovatian.com/2010/05/build-systems/comment-page-1/#comment-41 innovatian Tue, 11 May 2010 04:15:43 +0000 http://innovatian.com/?p=396#comment-41 I don't think I miss the point. I believe my terminology may be loose, which I am often guilty of, but it is the xml configuration that I am referring to in msbuild and nant leading to the inability to debug them as you would a true script. I believe that the nant and msbuild files are valuable as they give us a data model to base the new tools on. I don't think I miss the point. I believe my terminology may be loose, which I am often guilty of, but it is the xml configuration that I am referring to in msbuild and nant leading to the inability to debug them as you would a true script. I believe that the nant and msbuild files are valuable as they give us a data model to base the new tools on.

]]> By: derickbailey http://innovatian.com/2010/05/build-systems/comment-page-1/#comment-39 derickbailey Tue, 11 May 2010 02:17:59 +0000 http://innovatian.com/?p=396#comment-39 FWIW: you don't have to install ruby on a machine to use it. you can xcopy the runtime around and it works just fine. i've got a blog post on this and there's a link in the comments from alexander gross that shows how he stripped the ruby runtime down to only a couple of megs in file size.<br><br><a href="http://www.lostechies.com/blogs/derickbailey/archive/2010/03/23/running-ruby-and-rake-and-albacore-without-installing-them.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://www.lostechies.com/blogs/derickbailey/ar...</a> FWIW: you don't have to install ruby on a machine to use it. you can xcopy the runtime around and it works just fine. i've got a blog post on this and there's a link in the comments from alexander gross that shows how he stripped the ruby runtime down to only a couple of megs in file size.

http://www.lostechies.com/blogs/derickbailey/ar…

]]> By: derickbailey http://innovatian.com/2010/05/build-systems/comment-page-1/#comment-37 derickbailey Tue, 11 May 2010 02:06:01 +0000 http://innovatian.com/?p=396#comment-37 you may have missed the point of what we're trying to get away from with psake, rake, bake, etc... msbuild itself is not evil... it's the .msbuild files and their xml configuration that is evil. :)<br><br>that being said... i am currently working on some csc.exe stuff for my albacore framework. i would really like to get away from msbuild entirely. <br><br>the problem is not the msbuild.exe tool, the problem is xml configuration of build steps. if you're using visual studio to code, you don't have to deal with the underlying xml in the solution or project files and msbuild is just another command line tool to get your projects built. it's only when you start defining custom steps and processing in a .msbuild file that you have to start using xml and get into that ugly mess. you may have missed the point of what we're trying to get away from with psake, rake, bake, etc… msbuild itself is not evil… it's the .msbuild files and their xml configuration that is evil. :)

that being said… i am currently working on some csc.exe stuff for my albacore framework. i would really like to get away from msbuild entirely.

the problem is not the msbuild.exe tool, the problem is xml configuration of build steps. if you're using visual studio to code, you don't have to deal with the underlying xml in the solution or project files and msbuild is just another command line tool to get your projects built. it's only when you start defining custom steps and processing in a .msbuild file that you have to start using xml and get into that ugly mess.

]]> By: innovatian http://innovatian.com/2010/05/build-systems/comment-page-1/#comment-36 innovatian Mon, 10 May 2010 18:33:10 +0000 http://innovatian.com/?p=396#comment-36 Funny. I cringe when I see rake or psake calling out to nant and msbuild build files. It feels like the author forgot what they were trying to get away from in the first place. Yes, they could be migrating or refactoring to another tool, but it feels plain wrong. Funny. I cringe when I see rake or psake calling out to nant and msbuild build files. It feels like the author forgot what they were trying to get away from in the first place. Yes, they could be migrating or refactoring to another tool, but it feels plain wrong.

]]> By: robertmassa http://innovatian.com/2010/05/build-systems/comment-page-1/#comment-35 robertmassa Mon, 10 May 2010 17:57:43 +0000 http://innovatian.com/?p=396#comment-35 I read this this morning, and now this post appears on Los Techies, funny :-)<br><br><a href="http://www.lostechies.com/blogs/derickbailey/archive/2010/05/10/build-tools-for-net-systems-it-s-no-longer-a-question-of-features.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://www.lostechies.com/blogs/derickbailey/ar...</a> I read this this morning, and now this post appears on Los Techies, funny :-)

http://www.lostechies.com/blogs/derickbailey/ar…

]]>