Fast build, simple clean, updated packages and fixed package creation by sideeffffect · Pull Request #270 · fsprojects/ProjectScaffold · GitHub
Skip to content

Fast build, simple clean, updated packages and fixed package creation#270

Merged
pblasucci merged 6 commits into
fsprojects:masterfrom
sideeffffect:master
Oct 3, 2016
Merged

Fast build, simple clean, updated packages and fixed package creation#270
pblasucci merged 6 commits into
fsprojects:masterfrom
sideeffffect:master

Conversation

@sideeffffect

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

No description provided.

@forki

forki commented Aug 24, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@adamchester

Copy link
Copy Markdown

#258 and my opinion is the default build and test cycle should be build rather than rebuild. For releases etc, rebuild with full clean is probably best.

@forki

forki commented Aug 24, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

yep at least for proper release we need rebuild

@sideeffffect

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

so in that case let's still keep Build, but make sure Release depends on Clean as first

@sideeffffect

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

fixed. can we merge this now?

@pblasucci

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Point of order, invoking the "clean" target followed by the (newly edited) "build" target is not the same as telling MSBuild to rebuild the solution. My suggestion, if we're settled on not always rebuilding, is to create a "rebuild" FAKE target, which does tell MSBuild to rebuild the solution. Then have the "release" target depend on the (to be created) "rebuild" target.

@sideeffffect

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

hmm, are we sure? if the solution is Buildable from zero, calling first Clean and then Build should yield the same result as just Rebuild. That would mean Rebuild is redundant here.
a question with answers on StackOverflow

@sideeffffect

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

ping :)

@forki

forki commented Sep 14, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

My suggestion, if we're settled on not always rebuilding, is to create a "rebuild" FAKE target, which does tell MSBuild to rebuild the solution. Then have the "release" target depend on the (to be created) "rebuild" target.

+1

@sideeffffect

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

create a "rebuild" FAKE target ... have the "release" target depend on the (to be created) "rebuild" target

but Release already depends on Clean -- what difference would adding Rebuild make?

@sideeffffect

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@tpetricek could you please have a look at this?

@dsyme

dsyme commented Oct 3, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@sideeffffect @pblasucci Is this ready to go in?

@pblasucci

pblasucci commented Oct 3, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@dsyme I think we're still trying to come to an agreement. Two options currently on the table:

  • Use the MSBuild Rebuild action (for "Release" builds)

versus

  • Use MSBuild Clean + MSBuild Build (again, for "Release" builds)

Personally, I'm not really concerned either way (Project Scaffold was always meant to be learning aide -- not an all-encompassing tool). But @forki raised the point and I wanted to give it full "airing". Especially, since there are some subtle differences between the two sequences, as seen here.

What are your thoughts?

@sideeffffect

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@dsyme from my side we can merge

@pblasucci I've found a SO answer that basically says that my changes won't hurt -- Rebuild = Clean + Build (step by step, project by project)
my changes just Clean everything first and only after that Build everything

@pblasucci

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Gonna merge this because -- hey -- we can always patch it later if there are issues (and folks are meant to be customizing their scripts anyway).

@pblasucci pblasucci merged commit 1b31914 into fsprojects:master Oct 3, 2016
@sideeffffect

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants