The, uh, first PR: https://github.com/Microsoft/msbuild/pull/1
So, a troll/idiot tried to be funny. Let's not reward him with any more attention?
MSBuild is now open source on GitHub
71–80 of 185 posts
Re: MSBuild is now open source on GitHub
#72Nobody is seriously going to fork this and create their own port of MSBuild, possibly one of the most mocked and reviled parts of the .NET ecosystem. I do however congratulate the ground level MS staffers on the effort it likely took to convice the Risk and Legal departments that open sourcing something like this won't make their business fail. That must have been trying.
What's wrong with MSBuild/XBuild? I just type "msbuild" (or press F5 in VS) and I get result .exe file in 0.2 second. On Linux I type "xbuild" and it's the same. You can use Visual Studio without even knowing msbuild exists. Just occasionally a pre-build or post-build script needs to be added. Makefiles, Gradle or CMake are much slower and very complicated.
Crusty old GNU Make can be made to be very fast, even for large projects. It does take a bit of doing, however.
Re: MSBuild is now open source on GitHub
#73Re: MSBuild is now open source on GitHub
#74Despite being a Windows developer for 90% of my career, I have no idea why anyone uses MSBuild. I've created several automated build and deployment systems, but I always used the command line Visual Studio interface. Honestly, I don't know why anyone wants MSBuild. Poking around, people cite not needing to install the VS IDE on build servers, but I see zero drawback to doing that. Why would I want to maintain project…
> I could just build in exactly the same way, using the same solution/project files, on my dev box and my build server Do you run VS on your production servers? Because that's where it will shit a brick because you forgot to install ASP.Net MVC KB123123213 but the IDE installed it as part of update 4. Etc etc... This problem gets VERY deep.
Do you run VS on your production servers?
Why would I have any build system installed on a production server?
Re: MSBuild is now open source on GitHub
#75Re: MSBuild is now open source on GitHub
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
The historic commits might contain things unsuitable for relicensing. Also, never before have I heard such an absurd claim as to what the purpose of open source is.
I think it is an interesting perspective. What would you say the purpose of open source is? If not purpose, you can call it an attractive property. Let say you have the sources of an algorithm implementation, but they are unreadable because the variables are not named, you don't know the name of the algorithm getting implemented and so on. Of course this is a lot harder to understand than code which cites its referen…
> What would you say the purpose of open source is?
The Open Source Initiative has this to say: "Open source is a development method for software that harnesses the power of distributed peer review and transparency of process. The promise of open source is better quality, higher reliability, more flexibility, lower cost, and an end to predatory vendor lock-in."
Recognizing that "Free Software" and "Open Source" are terms for essentially the same thing originating from groups with slightly different goals, the FSF says this about Free Software: " Free software is about having control over the technology we use in our homes, schools and businesses, where computers work for our individual and communal benefit, not for proprietary software companies or governments who might seek to restrict and monitor us." [1]
Seeing the past history of a project before the point at which it was opened is somewhat related, but not necessary, to the motivation cited by the OSI, and not, as I see it, even related to the FSF motivation.
Re: MSBuild is now open source on GitHub
#77Will this help CMake's ability to generate solution files?
Re: MSBuild is now open source on GitHub
#78Nobody is seriously going to fork this and create their own port of MSBuild, possibly one of the most mocked and reviled parts of the .NET ecosystem. I do however congratulate the ground level MS staffers on the effort it likely took to convice the Risk and Legal departments that open sourcing something like this won't make their business fail. That must have been trying.
> Nobody is seriously going to fork this and create their own port of MSBuild
Except only a little project known as Mono [1]
> possibly one of the most mocked and reviled parts of the .NET ecosystem
News to me, people generally seem to like it.
1. https://twitter.com/migueldeicaza/status/237615174863958016
Re: MSBuild is now open source on GitHub
#79What's the difference with Roslyn?
Rosyln's a compiler/framework for certain language tools or something like that. Msbuild is like a Make type tool that actually calls the compiler, passes in flags and input files, determines what else needs to get done, etc.
Does it mean msbuilb uses roslyn somehow?
Re: MSBuild is now open source on GitHub
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
Visual Studio uses MSBuild. csproj/vbproj files are MSBuild files. MSBuild will take an SLN file as an argument and do the same as Visual Studio would do with it when you load it and click build.
Correct, VS commandline calls MSBuild. They're using MSBuild, they just don't know it.
Correct, VS commandline calls MSBuild.
That seems like an inaccurate description of what's happening: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11932164/what-parameters-...
They're using MSBuild, they just don't know it.
Given the age of projects I've worked on, and that it's unclear whether MSBuild is involved in VS's C++ compilation, I don't think your assumption is correct.