On Tue, 8 Jan 2002, Steve Loughran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, look at the nant project in sourceforge, and the nunit unit
testing.
nant is great and it means that Ant is doing something very well if
people start copying it for different environments.
I could start yet another pointless
Most of the posts on this thread were political instead of technical. And IMHO,
I only saw a few posts that got close to the real point. J# is more FUD than a
threat to Java 2, as it is aimed at the legacy Java 1.1 code that some
Microsoft customers might want to bundle into .NET projects. Until
At 02:35 PM 1/8/2002 -0800, Frank E. Weiss wrote:
The real horse at the other end of the tail is: Could Ant be used to build
.NET
assemblies? Here's a rad idea: could you use Ant as a replacement for (the
build part of) Visual Studio .NET?
I thought the real point was addressed when I pointed
From: Frank E. Weiss [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
The real horse at the other end of the tail is: Could Ant be used
to build .NET
assemblies? Here's a rad idea: could you use Ant as a replacement for (the
build part of) Visual Studio .NET?
-Original Message-
From: Jim White [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 2:39 PM
To: Ant Users List
Subject: Re: Sheesh, Ant for J#? What about ant for .NET?
... The next cool thing I see for Ant is an interactive shell.
jim
--
BTW, what is the current
- Original Message -
From: Conor MacNeill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Ant Users List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 14:56
Subject: RE: Sheesh, Ant for J#? What about ant for .NET?
From: Frank E. Weiss [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
The real horse at the other end
