Re: IDE for developing NAnt?

Hi,

I've been using Nano for my *nix system.  I have syntax highlighting
for C# on Nano if anyone needs it and the xml file can be altered to
edit NAnt build files.

Let me know.

Thanks,
Ryan

On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Charles Chan
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Great feedback from everyone. Thanks.
>
> The general direction I received are:
> 1) Keep VS (2003).sln file -- for casual developers.
> 2) Keep using NAnt's build file -- for running the full build, test, docs, etc. (majority)
>
> I won't pursuit this topic further as most people are happy with the current workflow.
>
> Regards,
> Charles
>
> --- On Sun, 3/7/10, Sean Foy <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> From: Sean Foy <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [nant-dev] IDE for developing NAnt?
>> To: [email protected]
>>
>> Personally I use GNU Emacs, even though the most popular c#
>> mode is
>> outdated and nobody has bothered to get flymake or mdb etc.
>> support
>> configured nicely. It is hard to beat VS.NET with
>> ReSharper, but after
>> having to do without for a few months due to corporate
>> bureaucracy, I
>> found that I didn't miss it much. The general editing
>> features and
>> support for everything else I'm doing (nxml, python, ...)
>> in Emacs are
>> more important to me than refactoring wizards, more
>> precise
>> intellisense, and better code highlighting.
>>
>> Eclipse was so great for Java in 2003 that I tried to use
>> its C#
>> perspective and that wasn't so good. MonoDevelop and
>> SharpDevelop c.
>> 2007 were functionally inferior to VS.NET+R#, though on the
>> bright
>> side one or both of them could use NAnt for building and
>> also had
>> intellisense for NAnt files.
>>
>
> Thanks for the suggestions. (Options: VS Express, MonoDevelop, SharpDevelope)
>
>>
>> I think NAnt should continue not to rely on VS.NET or any
>> other IDE for its canonical build instructions.
>
> Absolutely agree!
>
>>
>> One thing about the VS2003 solutions: last time I checked,
>> newer
>> VS.NETs could read older VS.NET solution files. What's the
>> advantage
>> in updating? If/when .NET 1.1 support is dropped of course
>> there's no
>> advantage in keeping VS2003 solution files around, but
>> until then you
>> can make it relatively easy for a larger set of
>> contributors to build
>> with less maintenance effort by keeping just the oldest
>> usable
>> solution file in the source tree.
>>
>
> [[ Before you read the next statement, and to avoid any concerns, let me be absolutely clear -- I AM NOT TOUCHING THE VS FILES. I don't want anyone to become upset. :) ]]
> By not upgrading the solution files, the only way to update it is ask someone with a copy of VS2003 to make the changes, or edit the XML directly. Otherwise, as soon as someone opens and save it again in a newer version, it will be converted. This shouldn't be a problem if we don't rely on VS.
>
>
>      __________________________________________________________________
> Make your browsing faster, safer, and easier with the new Internet Explorer® 8. Optimized for Yahoo! Get it Now for Free! at http://downloads.yahoo.com/ca/internetexplorer/
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Download Intel&#174; Parallel Studio Eval
> Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
> proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
> See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
> _______________________________________________
> nant-developers mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel&#174; Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev