Leo writes about the different projects that try to build upon Ant and in particular on top of Ant's import task.
In a parentheses he suggests that there was a flamefest going on between Ant and MSBuild and points to my blog. I've already commented in his blog, but since people follow his link looking for some action, I must disappoint you, there is no flaming.
In internet time, MSBuild is old news. There has been quite a lot of bad blood on some of the very first published statements by Microsoft that compared MSBuild to (N)Ant, in particular the initial revision of Brent Rector's "Introducing Longhorn for Developers", but this has been rectified later by the people responsible for MSBuild.
I for one am very interested in MSBuild since it takes a few different angles to building stuff than Ant. While being rather similar at the surface, there are some philosophical differences between the two (three, we shouldn't forget NAnt here).
The items in MSBuild still interest me a lot and I've not given up the idea to get something similar along with pipes into Ant (1.7/8/9, who knows). Of course, I still believe that Ant's approach to dependencies is superior to MSBuild's file timestamp based mechanism.
path: /en/dotNet/msbuild | #
It seems that Alex Kipman, the MSBuild Program Manager, will start a blog.
Just trying to help John to increase the "peer pressure". ;-)
Alex subscribed to the developer lists for both Ant and NAnt when Microsoft announced MSBuild last year. He's done a lot to calm the situation by answering questions as well as correcting some statements made about Ant and NAnt by Microsoft Press.
I'm looking forward to read more from him.
path: /en/dotNet/msbuild | #