D]
> Subject: RE: [nant-dev] FAQ: The next NAnt version
>
>
> > It's been a week since I've seen anything word on this.
> > Is anything happening?
>
> Just to remove any expectations on me. I don't plan on doing the
> release. I think there should be on
> It's been a week since I've seen anything word on this.
> Is anything happening?
Just to remove any expectations on me. I don't plan on doing the
release. I think there should be one done and I'll give admin rights
for somebody to do it though but I don't have the time to manage and
test a rel
It's been a week since I've seen anything word on this.
Is anything happening?
John C Barstow
---
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Visual Studio.NET
comprehensive development tool, built to increase your
productivity. Try a free o
Title: Message
Here's an NUnit v2 implementation based on one from the daily-snapshot
archive about 4 weeks ago, adds a
couple things including:
failifnotests
attribute--this allows for "querying" an assembly for tests and returning w/o
build-error if none (catches the NUNit NoTestFix
Bernard,
> Since you probably know best how the NUnit2 integration works, would you
> be willing to make these changes?
> Unless there is a better and easier solution.
Sure, I can do that, no prob I'll take a stab at it tonight.
--
Tomas Restrepo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
November 22, 2002 1:26 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: NUnit 2 support (was: RE: [nant-dev] FAQ: The
> next NAnt version)
>
>
> Hi Bernard,
>
> <<
> If the fork attributes would be removed and set to true
> internally, and
> (only) the NAntCont
Tomas:
(re: NantContrib:)
>I'm not sure if it's worh it to keep them separated
>anymore.
>Any thoughts?
While I understood the reasons behind the separation, I have felt for a
while that they should be recombined, if not for technical reasons (like
versioning) then for end-user clarity:
1) havin
Subject: Re: NUnit 2 support (was: RE: [nant-dev] FAQ: The next NAnt
version)
> I agree that a lot of those tasks should be rolled into the main NAnt
> project. I think there is still a place for NAntContrib as a place for
> user submissions. The idea being that there is a lower barrier
I agree that a lot of those tasks should be rolled into the main NAnt
project. I think there is still a place for NAntContrib as a place for
user submissions. The idea being that there is a lower barrier of entry
to the contrib project and the best - ie useful to most people tasks get
moved int
Hi Bernard,
<<
If the fork attributes would be removed and set to true internally, and
(only) the NAntContrib tests would be run using the command line runner,
would there be other problems that need to be solved to make the NUnit2
task work for real-world usage?
>>
I think that would work out, y
age-
> From: Tomas Restrepo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 4:25 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: NUnit 2 support (was: RE: [nant-dev] FAQ: The
> next NAnt version)
>
>
> John,
>
> > I noticed that NUnit2Task was executing
John,
> I noticed that NUnit2Task was executing very different code based on the
> fork attribute; code that looks suspiciously like the current code in
> nunit-console.
I'd like to refactor that code slightly, but that's a different thing
altogether :)
> Maybe this is a simpler workaround than
Hello Gerry,
Since the *NAnt* snapshots have not changed since 2002-11-15, we could
use that version as a baseline for testing.
When using workaround [1] for NUnit 2 support, it should be a useful
candidate for testing.
[1]
http://www.mail-archive.com/nant-users%40lists.sourceforge.net/msg001
>The only thing I am hearing today is that there is a gap in NAnt's Nunit2
>support. Please forgive my NUnit ignorance. Is the only gate NUnit2
support?
>Can NUnit 2 support be added later via a task?
IMHO, a documented workaround for NUnit2 would be acceptable for the next
release. A point relea
PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Re: [nant-dev] FAQ: The next NAnt version
Placing the responsibility of getting a release out on the project
admins isn't going to work if the past is any indication of the future
:)
The best way to get a release done is for a number of people to t
Placing the responsibility of getting a release out on the project
admins isn't going to work if the past is any indication of the future
:)
The best way to get a release done is for a number of people to take a
nant-snapshot and QA it to the level that they would feel comfortable to
say that this
55:52 +0100
From: BVB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Tomas Restrepo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] FAQ: The next NAnt version
Tomas,
If you see changing NUnit2 as the only solution, it may be less work to
step back from linking to the NUnit2 libraries and use
>>I am aware of the NUnit to NUnit 2 migration, and have been able to use
>>the latest NAnt and NUnit 2 using the exec task/console runner workaround.
Hi, first-time user - just figured out that 0.7.9 is badly out of date, now
using daily snapshot.
I need to set up an NUnit2 task for my project -
Tomas,
If you see changing NUnit2 as the only solution, it may be less work to
step back from linking to the NUnit2 libraries and use the command line
runner instead.
Reasons:
- The NUnit 2 command line runner has XML/XSLT support built-in.
- Decoupling the NUnit2 task from a specific NUnit2 bu
tting some sort of workaround for this Tomas ?
Ian
OpenSource creedo - Release early and release often.
Kevin Miller
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Mastracci [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 2:56 PM
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] FAQ: The
Cool- just going it working with the TortoiseCVS version of PLink, that
prompts for the password in a dialog, rather than by stdin/stdout. Now
I'm getting this error. Any ideas?
C:\Temp>cvs -d:ext:mmastrac@nant:/cvsroot/nant co nant
cvs server: Updating nant
cvs server: failed to create lock d
, November 20, 2002 2:56 PM
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] FAQ: The next NAnt version
While everyone's awake in here - can I ask which branch tag the next
version of NAnt is coming from? I'm sitting on the resx and license
tasks for the moment. As well, I'm still trying t
MacLean
Sent: 20 November 2002 21:25
To: Matthew Mastracci
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] FAQ: The next NAnt version
Matthew Mastracci wrote:
> While everyone's awake in here - can I ask which branch tag the next
> version of NAnt is coming from? I'm sitting on the
This is the response I get from cvs. Could be the version of CVS I'm
using, perhaps
Note that I have NAnt set up as a PuTTY connection.
C:\Temp>set CVS_RSH=plink
C:\Temp>cvs -d:ext:mmastrac@nant:/cvsroot/nant co nant
cvs checkout: warning: unrecognized response
`[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
' from
Matthew Mastracci wrote:
While everyone's awake in here - can I ask which branch tag the next
version of NAnt is coming from? I'm sitting on the resx and license
tasks for the moment. As well, I'm still trying to get CVS under
windows to work over PLink to sourceforge so I can actually check
While everyone's awake in here - can I ask which branch tag the next
version of NAnt is coming from? I'm sitting on the resx and license
tasks for the moment. As well, I'm still trying to get CVS under
windows to work over PLink to sourceforge so I can actually check in. :)
Kevin Miller wrot
Everytime this thread is brought up I always have to chime in and say here
here.
So as expected I totally agree. I have 0.7.9.0+ version of NAnt + misc
NAntContrib tasks that I support so that we can actually use NAnt in some
stable fashion. I would rather base my support on a more current ve
Bernard,
> In short, bringing out a new release (0.8.0) is needed.
> Note: A combined NAnt + NAntContrib package Would Be Nice as well, but
> first things first.
>
> I suggest a no-new-features-are-needed approach for this version.
> The question is: What really *needs* to be done before the new
No comments other than just this morning I was thinking the same thing. Let's have a
release!
- Jason
-Original Message-
From: Bernard Vander Beken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 2:39 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [nant-dev] FAQ: The next NAnt version
29 matches
Mail list logo
