Viktor Szakáts wrote:
>
>>> In some cases it may not be obvious first. We should
>>> implement
>>> everything in its best place and avoid implementing the same
>>> thing in both projects, as a general rule.
>>>
>>
>> This is useful but can be separated from build process.
>> After each successfull build some visual option somewhere
>> on the IDE should appear to carry the extended tasks.
>> OR
>> we can extend "Environments" like
>> {install} _path_to_the_installation_folder
>> {upx} level5
>> {ftp} http://myftp.ftp [ with all usual attributes }
>>
>> Then {install} and {ups} can be translated to hbMK2 syntax
>> and forwarded in the .hbp. Because FTP is a different beast,
>> and does not ( and should not ) form a part of hbMK2, be kept
>> as separate process invoked via hbIDE. We can even think of
>> scheduling the FTP uploads.
>
> Please don't add duplicate syntaxes for hbmk2 options
> if possible, it's enough to add one per config "{hbmk2}"
> line to gather all hbmk2 options, and that's it.
>
> There is enough things to learn about Harbour already,
> and it'd be beneficial for everyone not to learn and remember
> (and develop) the same things twice in different ways.
>
> Looks like my message can't really go through and it's
> quite sad to see. Maybe I can't express it in English
> properly.
>
Oh yes, I am reading the posts from 1-up so it came late.
I have already agreed to {hbMK2} section. It simplifies a
lots of actions.
Now I am realizing the full power of hbMK2.
Thank you for this great tool.
Pritpal Bedi
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/hbIDE---Requested-Thought-of-Features-Tracking-tp27313368p27315695.html
Sent from the Harbour - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB)
[email protected]
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
