According to the rc4 documentation, unless you specify a path, it will
try and find cvs in your path. So it looks like your cvs binary doesn't
support the -P flag, (perhaps it does it by default, which is how I
think it definitely should be)
If you want to use the built in cvs implementation, yo
Title: Message
Hi
Steve,
Can
you post a test case to the sharpcvslib dev list (cc'd on this email). The
nightly build might be the way to go if you are able
to, the in the nightly build can be
configured to use a different cvs executable (such as cvsnt). It still
uses the sharpcvs lib
Gert Driesen wrote:
I actually have to agree with Clayton in some way ...
Verbose is not always bad, I would prefer this :
over this
any day ...
Why ? The ability to have conditions I can see but y
Message -
From: "Clayton Harbour" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Nicklas Norling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Ian MacLean"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Jaroslaw Kowalski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004
t; -Original Message-
> > From: Clayton Harbour [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: den 17 mars 2004 15:34
> > To: Ian MacLean; Jaroslaw Kowalski
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: RE: [Nant-users] CVS update
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
>
nt release.
Cheers,
Clayton
> -Original Message-
> From: Kevin Dickover [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: March 17, 2004 6:41 AM
> To: Clayton Harbour; 'Jaroslaw Kowalski'; 'Gert Driesen';
> 'Scott Hernandez'; 'Ian MacLean'; [EMAIL PR
> Sent: den 17 mars 2004 15:34
> To: Ian MacLean; Jaroslaw Kowalski
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Nant-users] CVS update
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Honestly I wouldn't really see a problem with using the same
> syntax for the task and that is one of the reasons
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 9:55 PM
To: Jaroslaw Kowalski; Kevin Dickover; Gert Driesen; Scott Hernandez; Ian
MacLean; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [Nant-users] CVS update
Hi,
-1000 for the framework idea :-). Okay I am going to try to put my
bruised ego aside and pull something constructive
Message-
> From: Ian MacLean [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: March 17, 2004 1:45 AM
> To: Jaroslaw Kowalski
> Cc: Clayton Harbour; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Nant-users] CVS update
>
>
> I'd have to say 2 also. Forcing users to use the nested
>
> a
tt
Hernandez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Ian MacLean"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 3:55 AM
Subject: RE: [Nant-users] CVS update
Hi,
-1000 for the framework idea :-). Okay I am going to try to put my
bruised ego aside an
ED]>; "Gert Driesen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Scott
Hernandez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Ian MacLean"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 3:55 AM
Subject: RE: [Nant-users] CVS update
> Hi,
>
> -1000
Hi,
-1000 for the framework idea :-). Okay I am going to try to put my
bruised ego aside and pull something constructive from this :-).
Framework aside for now the issue is: what syntax do you prefer:
1) option collections (current):
Clayton Harbour wrote:
I like the nested command and it looks like it would be
easy to extend
something like this into some sort of pluggable version
control task.
Why do you want to do it? The last thing we need here is abstraction.
I would like to do this because it p
> > I like the nested command and it looks like it would be
> easy to extend
> > something like this into some sort of pluggable version
> control task.
>
> Why do you want to do it? The last thing we need here is abstraction.
I would like to do this because it provides a framework to add more
> I like the nested command and it looks like it would be easy to extend
> something like this into some sort of pluggable version control task.
Why do you want to do it? The last thing we need here is abstraction.
CVS is simple. Ultra simple. Various VCSes have different concepts and
features so
ion of cvs, sorry for the ctrl-c/ctrl-v error from the
1st post.
So...where do we go from here?
Clayton
> -Original Message-
> From: Kevin Dickover [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: March 15, 2004 6:18 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [Nant-users] CVS update
>
>
>
>
>
>
> There doesn't really seem to be an elegant way to do this...
What's wrong with the following syntax (modulo attribute names)? Why do you
require the separation of global vs command options?
Why would you want to enclose multiple cvs operations inside a single
task? Typically
I am a NAnt 0.84 user and cannot use the CVS tasks because they do not
currently support sspi (sspi support would be a compelling reason to move to
a nightly build, otherwise we will stick to official releases). However, I
would like to see the -P -d -R options turned on by default when the tasks
mportant this is before I
change it. I don't want to spend a lot of my free time on this if it is not an issue.
Cheers,
Clayton
> -Original Message-
> From: Jaroslaw Kowalski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: March 14, 2004 11:38 AM
> To: Clayton Harbour; [EMAIL PROTECT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 8:23 PM
Subject: RE: [Nant-users] CVS update
> Jarek,
>
> Splitting the option sets into a global option set and a command specific
option set is something done in cvs already, not something I am introducing.
If you are unsure of what I
March 14, 2004 10:01 AM
> To: Clayton Harbour; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Nant-users] CVS update
>
>
> Why do you want to split options into "global" and "command"
> ? This introduces a new class of problem: "which option is
> global and whi
MAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jaroslaw Kowalski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Narendra Kulkarni"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 6:37 PM
Subject: RE: [Nant-users] CVS update
> Hi Jarek,
>
> I don't really like the idea of sp
ski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: March 14, 2004 8:54 AM
> To: Clayton Harbour; Narendra Kulkarni;
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Nant-users] CVS update
>
>
> I don't think it's a problem.
>
> Users don't usually think in terms of command line optio
in a single attribute):
What do you think?
Jarek
- Original Message -
From: "Clayton Harbour" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jaroslaw Kowalski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Narendra Kulkarni"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
S
ur; Narendra Kulkarni;
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Nant-users] CVS update
>
>
> Clayton,
>
> Wouldn't it be better to implement some meaningful attributes
> for this?
>
>
>
> (BTW. I believe -Pd are so common that they should be on by
> defa
r" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Narendra Kulkarni" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 6:31 AM
Subject: RE: [Nant-users] CVS update
Hi Narendra,
Using the latest nightly builds you will have to do 2 things:
1) set the usesharpcvslib
Title: Message
Hi
Narendra,
Using the latest nightly builds you
will have to do 2 things: 1) set the usesharpcvslib
attribute to false (either the task level attribute or there is a global/
project level attribute) 2) send in the command
options -Pd; please double check the actu
27 matches
Mail list logo
