Hi Matthew,
I've had another look at how our delete task is working right now, and the
more I think of it, the more I'm convinced that we should change it to match
the Ant delete task.
Right now, we remove all directories that are matched by the fileset. But
this does not respect any excludes.
I just checked in a change to fileset scanning that eliminates a large
chunk of time (checked via profiling) during many of the common NAnt
operations.
One of the biggest losers on the profiling run was Regex.Match(), called
many, many times during a build. The new code replaces a good
Good work. That is one that needed to be optimized :)
Do you have profiler stats/results on other most called, or time most spent
in, functions? It would be good to list them so anyone out there could step
up to challenge themselves with optimizing those functions. Just an idea...
-
Scott Hernandez wrote:
Good work. That is one that needed to be optimized :)
Do you have profiler stats/results on other most called, or time most spent
in, functions? It would be good to list them so anyone out there could step
up to challenge themselves with optimizing those functions. Just an
Hi,
* Gert Driesen wrote on 07.06.2004 (12:37):
Are you using a very recent version of NAnt, as the include element was
only recently added. You might want to try the includes element :
Is 25.05.2005 recent enough? But I tried (and got deprecated
messages). Nothing changed. I've overseen that
/
/binaries
/ftpdown
Gert
- Original Message -
From: Sascha Andres [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 06, 2004 12:01 PM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] FileSet attribute
Hi,
currently my code looks like this:
// the binaries property
[BuildElement(binaries)]
public
Hi,
currently my code looks like this:
// the binaries property
[BuildElement(binaries)]
public FileSet binaries {
get {
return _binaryFileset;
} set {
_binaryFileset = value;
}
} // BinaryFileset
The usage:
if (null != _binaryFileset) {
Hi,
for my ftp tasks I try to introduce two fileset attributes,
but had no real success until now. Here's how I tried:
// variable:
private FileSet _binaryFileset = new FileSet();
// property:
[TaskAttribute(binaries)]
public FileSet binaries {
get {
return _binaryFileset;
- Original Message -
From: Scott Hernandez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Clayton Harbour [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Nant-Developers (E-Mail) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 11:15 PM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] fileset deprecations
+1 on co-existence, of include+includes, for a release
Gert Driesen wrote:
I was also thinking about a warnaserror switch, similar to what the MS
compilers have ... But I'm not sure that's a good idea, as every warning
that is logged would cause a build failure, and we currently even log errors
without causing a build failure ... Guess we'll have to
- Original Message -
From: Ian MacLean [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Gert Driesen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Scott Hernandez [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Clayton Harbour
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; Nant-Developers (E-Mail)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 9:08 AM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] fileset deprecations
Gert Driesen wrote:
Not for extra attributes/elements, no ...
Another option is to have a
dedicated switch -strict or -failoninvalidelements ( horrifically long
) that will fail only on invalid structure warnings - ie
elements/attributes that aren't valid.
Maybe yes, but I think we could
Gert Driesen wrote:
We could just not do strict checking for any Task/Element that overrides
the InitializeTask method.
A lot of tasks (I think) override InitializeTask to just perform checks ...
Ok then. How about other attributes that would go on classes that have
customised checking.
- Original Message -
From: Ian MacLean [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Gert Driesen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Scott Hernandez [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Clayton Harbour
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; Nant-Developers (E-Mail)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 9:37 AM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] fileset deprecations
- Original Message -
From: Ian MacLean [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Gert Driesen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Scott Hernandez [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Clayton Harbour
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; Nant-Developers (E-Mail)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 9:35 AM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] fileset deprecations
Gert Driesen wrote:
A lot of tasks (I think) override InitializeTask to just perform checks
...
We could ofcourse add a virtual method called ValidateTask method
that tasks
should use for performing additional checks, that would be more
clear ...
I'm pretty sure that was the purpose
- Original Message -
From: Ian MacLean [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Gert Driesen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Scott Hernandez [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Clayton Harbour
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; Nant-Developers (E-Mail)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 17, 2004 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] fileset deprecations
Hi,
What do you think about deprecating the following fileset elements :
includes
excludes
and replacing them by
include
exclude
and adding excludes and includes attributes on the fileset element (to allow
a list of patterns to be stored in a property).
Note: these deprecated elements would
Gert Driesen wrote:
Hi,
What do you think about deprecating the following fileset elements :
includes
excludes
and replacing them by
include
exclude
the naming is clearer I suppose but there is a certain amount of inertia
- there are a lot of build files out there wil the current naming.
and
Hi,
the naming is clearer I suppose but there is a certain amount of
inertia
- there are a lot of build files out there wil the current naming.
I know, that why I'm asking ... we'll see how others respond
... we could ofcourse have both of them coexist, and then
deprecate
+1 on co-existence, of include+includes, for a release or two, but totally
removal by 1.0.
As for the strict enforcement of only declared elements and properties for
tasks/types, I had done some work on that a long time ago. Take a look at
the Element.AttributeConfigurator.InitilizeElement() code
Yeah, now the only problems is to implement it. :) (remember, it needs to
efficient too)
We are accepting patches on this one! Will someone step up to the plate?
I've moved this into the dev list.
- Original Message -
From: Hearn, Bruce [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Scott,
I think you nailed it.
There is patch to support very nice feature as it is described in docs:
FileSet. includes: comma-separated list of patterns of files that must
be included
Martin
fileset.patch
Description: Binary data
... Ian, what do you think ?
Gert
- Original Message -
From: Martin Aliger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: ! nant [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 5:27 PM
Subject: [nant-dev] FileSet
There is patch to support very nice feature as it is described in docs:
FileSet
PROTECTED]
To: Martin Aliger [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ! nant
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 6:04 PM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] FileSet
Just my personal opinion, but I'm not sure I like this ...
It is just a personal preference, I do know Ant supports it (but I don't
think it's used
Ian,
I've a target like the following that simply initializes a file set:
target name=dist
...
fileset id=archive.set basedir=${build.dir}
...
includes name=../AUTHORS/
includes name=../COPYRIGHT/
includes name=../LICENSE/
includes name=${package.name}/**/
excludes
Gius,
I forgot to make the filest in zip task settable - shold be fixed now.
Ian
Ian,
I've a target like the following that simply initializes a file set:
target name=dist
...
fileset id=archive.set basedir=${build.dir}
...
includes name=../AUTHORS/
includes name=../COPYRIGHT/
I forgot to make the filest in zip task settable - shold be fixed now.
You added a unit test for this before fixing it, right? :)
John C Barstow
---
This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including
Data Reports,
Its definately in cvs. I've done a clean check out into a seperate
directory and the example below works fine. Are you seeing errors ? What
isn't working ?
Ian
Ian,
On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 11:35, Ian MacLean wrote:
fileset references are done. I still need to add some unit tests and
polish a
On Sat, 2003-06-28 at 16:10, Ian MacLean wrote:
Its definately in cvs. I've done a clean check out into a seperate
directory and the example below works fine. Are you seeing errors ? What
isn't working ?
NAnt simply says Unknown task fileset.
Gius_.
Ian
Ian,
On Tue, 2003-06-24 at
On Sat, 2003-06-28 at 16:15, Ian MacLean wrote:
windows or linux ? - is your fileset definition at the project level ?
fileset definitions at target level are not supported right now.
A-ha, that's the problem... I'm trying to use fileset definitions at
target level...
Gius_.
Ian
On
cool. I'm just adding support for target level now. Its pretty
straightforward.
Ian
On Sat, 2003-06-28 at 16:15, Ian MacLean wrote:
windows or linux ? - is your fileset definition at the project level ?
fileset definitions at target level are not supported right now.
A-ha, that's the
-- Original Message --
From: Ian MacLean [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [nant-dev] fileset references
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 18:35:04 +0900
fileset references are done. I still need to add some unit tests and
polish a few things but its all working.
try somthing like
Title: Fileset references
Hi all,
does anybody know how far is the implementation of
fileset refereces?
(see www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg01418.html
for more info)
Gius_.
Giuseppe Greco
T-Systems CS AG
Birkenstrasse 21
8306 Brüttisellen
Phone: +41 (0) 1 805 57 20
Fax:
+1 for this. This would be really sweet.
brant
...
From: Philip Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [nant-dev] Fileset references
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 11:15:20 -0800 (PST)
So the two valid forms would be:
1.) (how things work now)
foreach ...
!-- stuff to do
I think there might be problems with the fileset functionality:
A couple of examples:
1) In a directory c:\build\pn\bin I have three dlls:
SciLexer.dll, libexpat.dll and libexpatw.dll
zip zipfile=test.zip
fileset
includes name=c:\build\pn\bin\*.dll /
/fileset
/zip
This task
Gerry,
This new format is much more readable and easier to type than before.
The major downside I see is for people writing tools to read and write
the build file - or using xslt to transform it. You can no longer rely
on just the Xml api;s to read and write the build file. There now needs
What do people think of this addition to the format of filesets? Look at
the sources element of the build task. The build task is my own
private task. I thought it would be better to include the entire buildfile
in full so that if people could come up with a better syntax they could edit
the
I am working on a NAntContrib task for doing StarTeam source control
integration. I want to add a FileSet like capability to checkin/outs. The
primary difference is that it seems a FileSet is all about files local to
the system. Communications to the source server are expensive so the idea of
Oops, I suggested the exact same thing before I had
read this. Serves me right for not reading the whole
thread before replying.
In looking through the Ant code, the only tricky thing
they do is to ensure that there isn't a circular
reference. Not a hard check to do, but an important
one.
---
require each
refid'd task would have to know how to deal with a Reference.
I'm much more of the opinion that should do the xml merging, or double
xml initialization.
See the rest of my comments below.
-Original Message-
From: Tomas Restrepo
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] FileSet includes
Ian,
I think so. Right now property expansion doesn't happen until just
before task execution so that would kinda mandate define before
reference semantics. The other issue is property expansion itself. If
you're using a referenced Fileset that has a number of ${property} 's -
do you use
.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On
Behalf Of Kevin Dente
Sent: Thu, June 20, 2002 11:31 AM
To: Nant developer's list
Subject: [nant-dev] FileSet includes question
The (now out of date) Nant documentation on the
sourceforge site
solving your problem this way rather than
the comma seperated include pattern.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of Kevin Dente
Sent: Sun, June 23, 2002 6:12 PM
To: Gerry Shaw; 'Nant developer's list'
Subject: RE: [nant-dev] FileSet
I was thinking about the id'ed FileSet's. Here is what would need
changing:
* Add an Id property to the FileSet class
I'm kind of curious about why implement it this way it seems to me, that
everything in the buildfile should be able to be referenced by an ID, so I'd
think a more
I was thinking about the id'ed FileSet's. Here is what would need
changing:
* Add an Id property to the FileSet class
I'm kind of curious about why implement it this way it
seems to me, that everything in the buildfile should be able
to be referenced by an ID, so I'd think a
but it will be read many
times.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of Kevin Dente
Sent: Thu, June 20, 2002 11:31 AM
To: Nant developer's list
Subject: [nant-dev] FileSet includes question
The (now out of date) Nant documentation
The (now out of date) Nant documentation on the
sourceforge site for the FileSet says the following
about the includes element:
comma-separated list of patterns of files that must
be included
I read this to mean that a single include tag can
have multiple, comma-separated files/patterns in a
48 matches
Mail list logo
