Byrd, Payton wrote:
I'm afraid this isn't working for me.
Our system is structured like this:
default.build is our bootstrapper. It sets up shared properties for all
of the builds and loops through a CSV file calling the specified targets
against ProjectTemplate.build for each line in the CSV fil
Title: RE: [Nant-users] Transactionality in NAnt
I'm afraid this isn't working for me.
Our system is structured like this:
default.build is our bootstrapper. It sets up shared properties for all of the builds and loops through a CSV file calling the specified targe
Payton,
>>> When is the nant.rollback.onfailure.chain property set?
Either I missed something in the earlier thread or I misled you. Either the
nant.onfailure or nant.onsuccess target is called 1) assuming you have defined
them (since by default they are undefined), and 2) only after the execu
Title: RE: [Nant-users] Transactionality in NAnt
Wow, this seems very interesting. I'm going to weave this into our process and see what happens. You may have just saved me weeks of work.
When is the nant.rollback.onfailure.chain property set? It would seem that they would be includ
Merrill Cornish wrote:
Bevan,
every task needs to have built in "smarts" to support rollback.
Perhaps you have suggested an elegant way of providing
> transaction-like operation while not putting undue stress
> on Charlie.
What if each definition could include an OPTIONAL
> error recovery . As
>Which gets me asking, if not NAnt for deploying, then what?
CruiseControl, Draco, Hippo. My previous email covered what your
possible options were. you can have a basic CI environment with just
CC and NAnt. IF the build fails, then you can respond.
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:47:27 -0600, Butl
Bevan,
>>> every task needs to have built in "smarts" to support rollback.
Perhaps you have suggested an elegant way of providing transaction-like
operation while not putting undue stress on Charlie.
What if each definition could include an OPTIONAL error recovery
. As long as you can get by
Title: RE: [Nant-users] Transactionality in NAnt
Seems to me NAnt is meant as a build tool
not a deployment tool. A deployment tool certainly requires transactions. As a
build tool NAnt does not need transactions although some of the things
mentioned so far in the thread are certainly
necessary.
Regards,
Richard
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bevan Arps
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 14:13
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sourceforge. Net
Subject: RE: [Nant-users] Transactionality in NAnt
> I agree that a build is not a deploym
Title: RE: [Nant-users] Transactionality in NAnt
I agree that a build is not a deployment, but I do believe a build can be a component of a deployment. Our team is trying to address a few issues with our current methodology of deploying via MSI files to a web farm:
1) Multi-homed servers
I have to agree with Brad on this one. NAnt should be used for the
build only. Given, it is incredibly flexible, but you can't look at a
single tool to do all the work for you.
Look at CruiseControl.NET or Draco.NET for more transactional support
and doing deployment. I think the're are a few o
> I agree that a build is not a deployment, but I do believe
> a build can be a component of a deployment.
I am also looking to use NAnt as both a build tool and a deployment
tool. (Haven't got there yet, still setting up infrastructure).
I disagree, however, with the premise that NAnt should
Which gets me asking, if not NAnt for deploying, then what?
I'm in the same place as Payton in using NAnt for some deployment. The
goal is to have the nightly build complete and install itself onto the
web and app servers and then kick off the automated tests if the build
was successful. Our ap
Sorry, but I disagree with general "transactionality".
A build is not a deploy. If you choose to use NAnt for a deployment,
then that's fine; you may want to approach some kind of transaction
support for a deployment task that you might write for yourself. But
for general build purposes, there's j
14 matches
Mail list logo