-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 34
Match build.fsx to Makefile #7 #8
Conversation
|
If you keep using nuget then you should keep the restorepackages phase in the build script |
|
NuGet is only needed to fetch FAKE from install.cmd. |
|
Then it should be easy to switch to paket bootstrapper ;-)
|
|
I would definitely switch to Paket. The nuget usage and path |
|
I'll add that later today! |
|
I actually thought about switching to powershell, as that would not require us to download any other tools. Thoughts? |
|
Hmm, though I suppose FAKE + Paket would be sufficient for a single "build" script. |
|
If you are thinking of removing the Makefile and just using Paket/FAKE then there could just be a single build script, which is better than having two probably. As I said on #7 the benefit of using Make is that it handles dependencies better than FAKE (which doesn't avoid recompilation or patterns like .el -> .elc unless I'm mistaken), but if that isn't needed and the Makefile is just a glorified shell script then it seems reasonable to use FAKE. |
|
(But @kjnilsson would know best for this repo) |
|
I won't remove the Makefile; I will just add a build.sh. |
|
Honestly, bash and powershell are probably sufficient. |
|
FWIW, I'm happy to remove the PowerShell attempt. I thought that might be simple, but I'm no PowerShell expert. Perhaps @ctaggart or some other PS whiz could help if there's interest. |
|
Please note, while I added |
|
In sublime, I let paket handle the downloading of FSAC, I thought it was neat. :) |
Match build.fsx to Makefile #7
No description provided.