|
View:
New views
4 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
|
|
AnkhSVN 2.0 anyone?Has anyone looked at AnkhSVN 2.0, the new version of the Subversion
integration for VS? It's completely integrated now-- no longer an Addin. Does this type of integration make sense for NMaven? ISTR there being some reason that NMaven had to be an Addin. Was there, and if so does that restriction still apply? [1] http://ankhsvn.open.collab.net/servlets/ProjectProcess?pageID=3794 Thanks, -- Wendy |
|
|
Re: AnkhSVN 2.0 anyone?They're using the source control (SCC) infrastructure [1].
The alternatives were an add-in or an integration package (VSPackage) [2] [3]. It was determined that an integration package would be better, but that it might constrain the ability to do it under open source. [4] It might be a good time to revisit this and consult the legal lists. Cheers, Brett [1] http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb165323(VS.80).aspx [2] http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb286994(VS.80).aspx [3] http://dotnet.sys-con.com/node/105646?page=1 [4] http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/NMAVEN-13 On 30/07/2008, at 10:16 AM, Wendy Smoak wrote: > Has anyone looked at AnkhSVN 2.0, the new version of the Subversion > integration for VS? It's completely integrated now-- no longer an > Addin. > > Does this type of integration make sense for NMaven? > > ISTR there being some reason that NMaven had to be an Addin. Was > there, and if so does that restriction still apply? > > [1] http://ankhsvn.open.collab.net/servlets/ProjectProcess?pageID=3794 > > Thanks, > -- > Wendy -- Brett Porter brett@... http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/ |
|
|
Re: AnkhSVN 2.0 anyone?On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 5:16 PM, Wendy Smoak <wsmoak@...> wrote:
> Has anyone looked at AnkhSVN 2.0, the new version of the Subversion > integration for VS? It's completely integrated now-- no longer an > Addin. > > Does this type of integration make sense for NMaven? > > ISTR there being some reason that NMaven had to be an Addin. Was > there, and if so does that restriction still apply? Initially, there were some conditions like MS had to approve the L&F, which didn't work. When I talked with Sam Ramji back in February he said that he thought that this had been removed but I haven't verified. He was pretty keen on trying to get MS licensing in line with Apache License 2.0, where possible and said he would work with us if the conditions don't match. Shane |
|
|
Re: AnkhSVN 2.0 anyone?Also looks like sandcastle may be back on the menu:
http://port25.technet.com/archive/2008/07/02/sandcastle-redux.aspx Shane On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Shane Isbell <shane.isbell@...>wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 5:16 PM, Wendy Smoak <wsmoak@...> wrote: > >> Has anyone looked at AnkhSVN 2.0, the new version of the Subversion >> integration for VS? It's completely integrated now-- no longer an >> Addin. >> >> Does this type of integration make sense for NMaven? >> >> ISTR there being some reason that NMaven had to be an Addin. Was >> there, and if so does that restriction still apply? > > > Initially, there were some conditions like MS had to approve the L&F, which > didn't work. When I talked with Sam Ramji back in February he said that he > thought that this had been removed but I haven't verified. He was pretty > keen on trying to get MS licensing in line with Apache License 2.0, where > possible and said he would work with us if the conditions don't match. > > Shane > > |
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |