On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Marc-Andre Laperle
<malaperle@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Doug,
First, let me say that I think this is a great idea!
On 10-03-10 2:16 PM, Doug Schaefer wrote:
Makefile project is assumed since it's unlikely you'd use this feature to add managed make to existing code (if you need to, you can use the previous workaround).
I disagree. Beginners want to use managed. Since this is a usability issue, I think it makes sense to support managed too. I'm a CS student and people who know how to write Makefiles are in the minority. The majority come from Visual Studio or they are too lazy to write/learn Makefiles. I personally use the managed "workaround" 90% of the time. Is there a bug opened for the Makefile project case? I'd be happy to help with the managed project case.
The question is where did the existing code come from. I can't imagine many coming without a build file of some sort. This wizard is for projects that build with make and as per an earlier suggestion, I'll make that more explicit. If we want to support importing code that doesn't have a build system we could add that in to, but I'm treating that with a low priority.
This came together quicker than I expected so don't have a bugzilla yet. I'll create one and post here.
