I'm fine with getting rid of the perl and porting it all to .net. Any chance I 
could  use F# for some of the heavy lifting? I don't want to be a dick 
(warning: about to be a dick) but the less time I spent working through 
templating and asset zipping and calling external tools from msbuild, the 
happier I (and hopefully everyone else) will be. I'm extremely comfortable in 
ruby, but I can get everything to run from  1 msbuild command, all under .net. 

-Gabe McArthur

On Aug 23, 2011, at 11:27 AM, Mike Kestner <[email protected]> wrote:

> The only perl in master is the parser, which is not run at build time and is 
> not worth converting to .net regexes.  I'd rather pursue the gir2gapi XML 
> converters than spend any more time on the parser than the occasional bugfix 
> at this point.
> 
> There was a perl script in older versions to do cdecl mangling, but that's 
> gone in master.
> 
> I agree on avoiding the ruby dep.  If we are going to xbuild/msbuild, it's to 
> simplify the windows build and general portability.  Adding ruby won't help 
> there.
> 
> Mike
> 
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Andres G. Aragoneses <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to