Mark, I'm curious about your view of the dependencies. 'Cuz I'm about to get dumped into a much wider WANned environment next year... (Lil' startup company sandbox, how little we knew ye.) Who knows? I may even lose local control of my SCC if/when it gets moved into some big corporate bomb shelter.
> Mark Griffiths wrote: > Draco is the glue between SCC and build tools, ideally the build tool > should know nothing > about the SCC system (or Draco). The dependency diagram should be > something like: > > SCC <- Draco -> Build Tool > > I agree with you that Draco should remain very lean and sharp. I can't > see it ever > rivaling NAnt and MSBuild, it's just glue. I see them as a triumvirate, not a linear set. Draco watches SCC and notifies its client, Build Tool, which gets what it needs from SCC when Draco fires an event... This is how we've currently got VSS, Draco and NAnt deployed: SCC <------ Build Tool ---> Output ^ ^ | | | | |--- Draco ---| Why should the build widget be source control agnostic? What makes that "ideal"? I'm open to education if there are good reasons that I'm blissfully unaware of. :) Thanx. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials. Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills. Sign up for IBM's Free Linux Tutorials. Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin. Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id78&alloc_id371&op=click _______________________________________________ Draconet-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/draconet-users
