Geeks With Blogs

News

Series

Add to Technorati Favorites


An Archived Managed World This blog has moved to http://www.managed-world.com/blog

I must be missing the boat somewhere here. I can't be Visual Studio .NET 2003 would be so hard to configure (default wise). Let me first say this so all of you can point me in the right direction if I'm wrong: I believe Visual Studio only “plays nice” if you work with the directory structure IT says you should. The problem is that I don't want to write in the same directory structure Visual Studio does.

Let me explain myself a bit, I am wanting more control over my directory structure for source control reasons. To support easier branching, tagging, and so on, I would like to have a directory structure like this (for a project codenamed Springwater):

  • /Springwater
    • /bin
    • /doc
    • /src
    • /temp
    • /test

So, ideally (IMO), all the source code would be in the src directory and ONLY the source. The resulting executables or assemblies would be in the bin folder for Release build and the test folder for Debug build. The temp directory would have all the intermediate object files generated in the process. The truth is that I don't want any files, other than source and documentation, in source safe. I don't want my bin, temp, or test directories in source safe. The problem is that, IIRC, Visual Studio sets up the project in the following structure:

  • /Springwater (all the source is in this folder)
    • /bin
      • /Debug
      • /Release
    • /obj
      • /Debug
      • /Release

I don't like that the compiler results are in child folders of the source directory. IMO, the source directory should be seperate from the compiler results so you can better tag and branch your source with worrying about all the imtermediate and final compiled files.

The problem I really encounter is when I have a solution file with multiple projects. For the example above, lets say that Springwater is the master solution and I have two projects called SpringwaterConsole and SpringwaterLibrary. In my mind, I would like them to have the following setup:

  • /Springwater
    • /SpringwaterConsole
      • /bin
      • /doc
      • /src
      • /temp
      • /test
    • /SpringwaterLibrary
      • /bin
      • /doc
      • /src
      • /temp
      • /test

There is certainly no easy way that I can find to have Visual Studio setup the solution and project files this way. I don't want to have to add a project to the solution and then manually change the locations of where the files are and correct the solution file. Perhaps it is at a point where I need to create an application that will create new blank projects with the settings I desire? Thoughts? Anyone else deal with these kind of issues setting up their environment or just deal with the defaults?

Sorry for the long post.

 

Posted on Tuesday, November 18, 2003 2:15 PM | Back to top


Comments on this post: Why, Visual Studio, Why?

No comments posted yet.
Your comment:
 (will show your gravatar)


Copyright © Jason Olson | Powered by: GeeksWithBlogs.net