I didn't mean to imply that (our)
developers shouldn't or don't build locally. In our company in fact they
do and can catch code errors this way before checking code in. Whether or
not they build locally with Nant is the issue, and in our case it's not
practical or useful to do that. It adds a layer of complexity that
the developer need not be concerned with. Not to mention our Nant
scripts (and I'm assuming many other's here as well) perform a myriad of tasks
before and after <solution> which are not relevant for
developers.
I'm not dismissing developers building
locally, nor using Nant for that purpose. We don't (use Nant
locally) and are very happy with our approach.
e
From: Troy Laurin
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Regarding developers building locally, I don't think I agree with the
(implied) attitude mentioned above... if developers don't need to
build locally, then you are placing them in the role of code
generators, and the build server is then taking the role of quality
and correctness auditor.
I find that developer attitudes and quality improve when they are
given the role of quality auditors as well as code generators.
Humans, in general, are better measurers of quality than computers
are, and simple things like mandatory code reviews, and encouraged
full-build-and-test before checkin I have found to dramatically
improve code quality. The knock-on effects to reduced number of bugs,
improved developer morale and improved customer confidence (you may be
your own customer here) have always more than paid for the cost of the
developers' time to perform these checks.
