IMHO the main point about migrating to MSBuild is preventing the hassle of depending on "unixy" tools in Windows. If you add a dependency to Ruby, you're introducing yet another problem (even if you're talking about IronRuby).
Also FYI there is some step in the GTK# build system that is done in Perl. I would vote to translate that to C# as first step. (This would sound risky to some people, but if the code translated to C# generates the same output as the Perl does currently, that's the best test to certify there are no main bugs in the migration.) Cheers On 08/22/2011 04:32 PM, Gabe McArthur wrote: > Sorry for not being clear. I'd love to take on the build stuff, learning > as I go about what's in the codebase. How open would you be to replacing > minor things that may be too verbose or time consuming to do with > msbuild in something like ruby? I used to be a build engineer at MS, and > there are few things I learned to enjoy less than maintain msbuild files. > > -Gabe McArthur > > On Aug 22, 2011, at 7:07 AM, Mike Kestner <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >> Hi Gabe, >> >> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 8:15 PM, Gabe Mc >> <<mailto:[email protected]>madeonamac@gmail. com >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Hey, >> >> I'm looking to contribute to mono in some way, and I thought that I >> could start with GTK#. I wanted to dig in and see what's involved and >> possibly make some fixes to make the system compatible with downstream >> tools (like mono-addins, which currently does not build with GTK#3.0). >> >> >> Not sure what you mean by making the system compatible. If you mean >> providing backwards compatibility in 3.0 to 2.x, I doubt that's going >> to be possible. Too much changed and was removed. Size negotiation, >> drawing, fundamental concepts which aren't going to map well. >> >> If you mean you want to start porting other libraries to work with >> 3.0, that may be premature, since we haven't even released a preview >> yet. You could probably start the ports on branches or a github fork >> though to be merged back later, and report and help any issues the >> ports expose in gtk-sharp master. >> >> I was also interested in making general build improvements, like >> possibly replacing Makefiles with xbuild project files. Any >> thoughts/criticisms of this idea? Am I stepping on toes? >> >> >> The glue is being reduced, but it's an obstacle to switching to xbuild >> projects. We would also need MSBuild tasks to do things like fixup and >> generation. Those are things I've wanted to do for a while, to make it >> easier to build on windows without cygwin/msys. It's not a trivial >> task though. If you wanted to take a stab, I'd be happy to try to >> answer questions as they arise. >> >> Mike > > > _______________________________________________ > Gtk-sharp-list maillist - [email protected] > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/gtk-sharp-list _______________________________________________ Gtk-sharp-list maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/gtk-sharp-list
