[MonoDevelop] Cross platform build strategy

[Peter Johanson]

On Wed, May 25, 2005 at 03:25:56PM -0500, Jayme wrote:
>    On 5/25/05, Todd Berman <[1]tberman at off.net> wrote:
> 
>      In theory we could bloat the repository and include an already
>      compiled
>      copy of NAnt there, but we gain nothing.
> 
>    In theory. Translation - uneducated excuse.

Troll.

> 
>      Dude. MD *NEVER WORKED ON WINDOWS*
>      NEVER
> 
>    Hrm I was certain a 1.0x release included monodevelop. It must have
>    been an RPM build on my linux box - you would know.
> 
>      We have that, .mdp and .mds
> 
>    These are standard formats? Why reinvent the wheel?
> 
>      > -Access to a ton of tasks that will exercise everything in the
>      .NET
>      > framework plus many open source tools that when used by
>      monodevelop
>      > can make the IDE even more attractive
>      Um, distill that into english, not marketing blah. That means
>      nothing to
>      me as a developer. and I doubt nant gets us that too easily.
> 
>    It may mean nothing to you as a developer - but people want to use
>    mono (and your IDE) to write software applications. Some of these
>    software applications might, god forbid, want to use the other tools
>    included with mono that are not visual (read - command line) and not
>    exposed through monodevelop. If you dont care, then you obviously care
>    only about your own productivity and not the other developers who
>    SHOULD be wanting to use your IDE. With this attitude I understand why
>    you look at monodevelop as a "for fun" product. Why not just shut the
>    thing down now and create a real project that bears the moniker "mono"
>    in the name for those of us who would like to create software that
>    makes money on mono instead of playing tinker toys with your side job
>    priorities. I don't think Novell created mono "for fun".

Troll.

> 
>      That has never been our intent, we want to provide linux users with
>      a
>      good IDE to do C# work in, not convert #D users to use an IDE that
>      doesn't even run on their host platform.
> 
>    Well my bad that it's beyond your technical abilities to recognize
>    that using strictly Gtk# could make your IDE run on all platforms that
>    support mono. Your being as ignorant as Microsoft to tie it to linux.

Troll.

> 
>      > -A reason for the NAnt team to create turn-key distros for linux
>      Uh. I guess... not really a win for anyone involved in MonoDevelop.
> 
>    Again you only care about the monodevelop team. I can see you've never
>    written software for a customer, or if you have, there's a reason why
>    your not anymore.
> 
>      > -Less lines of code in the build environment
>      *wrong*
>      You have no idea how much logic it would take to replicate make
>      install,
>      make run, make dist, and make distcheck.
> 
>    I have a perfect idea, I just converted 4 of your build scripts dude
>    and told you it halved the lines. Go ahead, tell me you've used Ant
>    with Java and don't believe me again...

And do the include the features like distcheck and dist?

> 
>      > -Better readability and validation of build files because they
>      are
>      > well formed XML not just text
>      dude.
>      make validates our makefiles.
> 
>    So it prevents you from putting a typo in the file with your text
>    editor? No it doesn't validate until you run. You can validate XML
>    before you even save it - oh that's right you knew that because of
>    your superior XML knowledge *rolls eyes*.

So it's validly formed XML. No more likely to actually *build* something
than a makefile is. Both actually need to be run to verify that, so
"valid XML" really doesn't gain you anything.

> 
>      And as far as a mono IDE depending on platform-specific code...
>      well..
>      auto* works fine on win32. look at SFW and cygwin please.
> 
>    So because you don't want to put a 5 meg installation (NAnt)
>    dependency on your build and standardize it for all platforms that
>    support mono, windows users should have to put the bloat that is
>    cygwin on their box. If you had a clue you'd realize how ignorant this
>    argument is. Obviously you don't.
> 
>      Get NAnt build files that do exactly what we do with the auto*
>      build
>      system, and we would happily look at switching. And because you
>      didn't
>      seem to see the list of things nant *doesnt* do for free, let me
>      list it
>      again:
>      1) i18n integration
>      2) make dist
>      3) make distcheck
>      4) make run
>      5) make install
> 
>    What a sad day. Someone please tell me when a customer focused IDE
>    project for mono is going to begin. This one's a waste of time...

Ok, stop trolling and actually address the points he's raising. Todd has
proposed several *concrete* issues faced in moving over to nant, and
you've dismissed them because you've chosen to make wild assumptions
about Todd's character, his experience, and what he does for a living.
Stop with the BS personal attacks, and stick to the technical issues.

-pete

>    -Jayme
> 
> References
> 
>    1. mailto:tberman at off.net

> _______________________________________________
> Monodevelop-list mailing list
> Monodevelop-list at lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/monodevelop-list


-- 
Peter Johanson
<latexer at gentoo.org>