<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Johannes,<br>
<br>
On 6/14/2013 2:34 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:alpine.DEB.1.00.1306142130430.28957@s15462909.onlinehome-server.info"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Hi Luke,
I re-Cc:ed the list because I feel it to be inappropriate to keep this
conversation a secret from our collaborators.
</pre>
</blockquote>
I certainly didn't mean to withhold information; in this case, it
may of been better to include the full text of my message. I've done
so at the bottom of this email.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:alpine.DEB.1.00.1306142130430.28957@s15462909.onlinehome-server.info"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
On Fri, 14 Jun 2013, Luke Stuyvenberg wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">[...] our rebase is going to be painful.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Not really, *iff* we wait until Mark switches their HEAD to 2010, and
*iff* you simply delete all of our changes to .vcxproj files.
</pre>
</blockquote>
As I said in my email to Mark, I intend to wait until they're done
switching the SVN head.
<blockquote
cite="mid:alpine.DEB.1.00.1306142130430.28957@s15462909.onlinehome-server.info"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Personally, I'd like to suggest we just accept Micro-Manager's changes
to all vcxproj and sln files (or not apply any of our own, as the case
may be), then fix our build when the dust settles. It isn't ideal, but
at least this way we have a well-defined conflict resolution for those
files...
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Right. That's what I meant by: our work was basically wasting time because
we cannot continue to use those changes.</pre>
</blockquote>
Not many of them, no. But as I said in the original (complete) text
of my email to you, good things _did_ come out of it -- for example,
the new build script, which I don't believe could have been
developed with the '08 build files (2010 was when msbuild, using an
XML-based build file, was introduced; it is this executable that the
new build script relies on.<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:alpine.DEB.1.00.1306142130430.28957@s15462909.onlinehome-server.info"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Unless you disagree, let's focus more on early collaboration on things
that are not specific to OpenSPIM.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">While we're on the topic of the build system, I wanted to run an idea
past you -- that is, adding VS projects for the Micro-Manager plugins
and acquisition engine. For people less inclined to build from the
command line, it may be helpful to create these projects and add them to
our working solution (most likely after the VS2010 update and our
rebase). The basic idea is much like that of Micro-Manager; I will
probably just have the project use NMake to call the ant build files of
the plugins and acquisition engine. (Especially considering since we say
'press F7 to build it all', it would make sense to do this.)
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
I agree. The easier it is to build it all, the better. Remember: I want
Jenkins to build this thing eventually.
Ciao,
Dscho
</pre>
</blockquote>
I'm not entirely familiar with Jenkins' capabilities -- would it be
able to run our build scripts as they sit? Or should I begin
preparing i.e. an overall ant or msbuild build file?<br>
<br>
Luke<br>
<br>
-------- Original Message --------
<table class="moz-email-headers-table" border="0" cellpadding="0"
cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT">Subject: </th>
<td>Fwd: Re: [micro-manager-general] Building MM in VS2012 on
Win8 Issues and fixes (and understanding why)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT">Date: </th>
<td>Fri, 14 Jun 2013 13:37:53 -0500</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT">From: </th>
<td>Luke Stuyvenberg <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:stuyvenberg@wisc.edu"><stuyvenberg@wisc.edu></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<th nowrap="nowrap" valign="BASELINE" align="RIGHT">To: </th>
<td>Johannes Schindelin <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:schindelin@wisc.edu"><schindelin@wisc.edu></a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<pre>We lost the mailing lists on this reply; I've let Mark know, but on the off chance he deliberately left them out of the communication, I haven't re-included micro-manager's (only our own).
Like I said. merge -s 'ours'. But I have to disagree with what you said in IRC -- our work wasn't wasted; though our project files will likely be replaced by those put out by Mark, things like the new build script (which couldn't have been developed with '08) are still valuable, an in fact will probably require minimal changes to work with the new project files.
Either way, though, our rebase is going to be painful. Personally, I'd like to suggest we just accept Micro-Manager's changes to all vcxproj and sln files (or not apply any of our own, as the case may be), then fix our build when the dust settles. It isn't ideal, but at least this way we have a well-defined conflict resolution for those files...
While we're on the topic of the build system, I wanted to run an idea past you -- that is, adding VS projects for the Micro-Manager plugins and acquisition engine. For people less inclined to build from the command line, it may be helpful to create these projects and add them to our working solution (most likely after the VS2010 update and our rebase). The basic idea is much like that of Micro-Manager; I will probably just have the project use NMake to call the ant build files of the plugins and acquisition engine. (Especially considering since we say 'press F7 to build it all', it would make sense to do this.)
Let me know what you think.
Luke
</pre>
</body>
</html>