Don't hardcode NuGet source

[bdukes]

With a clean clone, there are still issues running ./Build_Install_Package.bat, the first of which is an error resolving the new ClientDependency NuGet package from #2068. Currently, this PR fixes that NuGet issue by adjusting the nuget restore call done in the build process to use the nuget.config file instead of passing a -Source URL directly.

At this point, I'm now getting errors from the DotNetNuke.Modules.DDRMenu and DotNetNuke.Modules.HtmlEditorManager projects:

C:\Code\Dnn.Platform\Platform.testtest\DNN Platform\Modules\DDRMenu\DotNetNuke.Modules.DDRMenu.csproj(205,3): error MSB4019: The imported project "C:\Program Files (x86)\MSBuild\Microsoft\VisualStudio\v15.0\WebApplications\Microsoft.WebApplication.targets" was not found. Confirm that the path in the declaration is correct, and that the file exists on disk.

[bdukes]

So, it looks like on my local machine, that file should be found from C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio\2017\Enterprise\MSBuild\Microsoft\VisualStudio\v15.0\WebApplications instead of C:\Program Files (x86)\MSBuild\Microsoft\VisualStudio\v15.0\WebApplications\Microsoft.WebApplication.targets, which ultimately stems from using C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio\2017\Enterprise\MSBuild\15.0\Bin\MSBuild.exe instead of C:\Program Files (x86)\MSBuild\14.0\Bin\MSBuild.exe to run this process.

Currently, when building packages, the script attempts to find msbuild in this order:

1. %ProgramFiles(x86)%\MSBuild\15.0\Bin\MSBuild.exe
2. %ProgramFiles(x86)%\MSBuild\14.0\Bin\MSBuild.exe
3. %ProgramFiles(x86)%\Microsoft Visual Studio\2017\Community\MSBuild\15.0\Bin\MSBuild.exe
4. %ProgramFiles(x86)%\Microsoft Visual Studio\2017\Professional\MSBuild\15.0\Bin\MSBuild.exe
5. %ProgramFiles(x86)%\Microsoft Visual Studio\2017\Enterprise\MSBuild\15.0\Bin\MSBuild.exe

I propose that if there is an msbuild available in the environment, we should use that, otherwise it should look for the version bundled with Visual Studio before the standalone MSBuild. I don't know that any scenario is foolproof, unless maybe we search specifically for Microsoft.WebApplication.targets under the path before we settle on one?

Thoughts @tpluscode @galatrash @ahoefling @mitchelsellers?

[galatrash]

This is tricky abit. When I created this batch file I tried under different environment but was not exhaustive. I didn't want to look in the registry which requires elevated rights; I wanted it to be simple CLI job. If you have a better way to do it, please do and submit a PR.

[galatrash]

In fact the used sources are already added in the "$(PlatformCheckout)\.nuget\NuGet.Config file. So, this change is ok.

[SkyeHoefling]

@bdukes :

I propose that if there is an msbuild available in the environment, we should use that, otherwise it should look for the version bundled with Visual Studio before the standalone MSBuild. I don't know that any scenario is foolproof, unless maybe we search specifically for Microsoft.WebApplication.targets under the path before we settle on one?

I agree that we should pull msbuild out of the environment. We should pick a minimum version of visual studio and support that version to the latest.

I have always found it weird that the script looks for a particular version of msbuild and tries to fall through to the next. I'm sure there was a great reason for it but this has the potential to cause a lot of build side-effects.

• For example what do you do if someone installs Visual Studio into a non-standard path?

[bdukes]

I pushed the change to the build scripts which uses the MSBuild available in the environment, and only looks in those specific paths if it isn't defined. I think there may still be something off with the script, because it generates /Build/BuildScritps/_Install.zip instead of /Artifacts/DNN_Platform_9.2.1.123-456_Install.zip, but it's closer

[ohine]

This change looks good to me, hopefully it'll get us closer to consistent builds across different environments. Thanks @bdukes for submitting the pull request!

[dnfclas]

All CLA requirements met.

[bdukes]

This has been approved by two reviewers, is there anything holding up a merge?