ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Conor MacNeill" <co...@ebinteractive.com.au>
Subject RE: Unbundling copying support files from the javac task
Date Mon, 06 Mar 2000 22:44:59 GMT
George,

As I said, I prefer to be explicit about what I include in the build area.

How would you exclude a file called

.#Blahblah.java.1.14

This is a CVS artifact. I'm sure its possible with some clause,
excludes="%#%$#@"    :-).

In general what is to be included in the build is known while all the
garbage may not be known. If your jar file ends up including source code
remnants because you changed editor and forgot to add a new excludes clause
for its backup files, that may not be a good thing.

Its a bit like implicitly declared variables. Convenient typing saver, but a
pain in general.

Conor


> -----Original Message-----
> From: gfink@avallon.eng.sun.com [mailto:gfink@avallon.eng.sun.com]On
> Behalf Of george.fink@sun.com
> Sent: Tuesday, 7 March 2000 9:31
> To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Unbundling copying support files from the javac task
>
>
>
> Conor (and others),
>
> What is wrong with using excludes (or ignore) with the correct
> patterns to
> exclude these garbage files?
>
> For example, I put excludes="**/SCCS/**" in all my javac's and
> the problem is
> solved.
>
> --George
>
> > Glenn,
> >
> > The problem is that there tends to be other files that end up
> being copied
> > across that you don't really want. For example, CVS can leave
> versions of
> > files around when you do an update and there is a conflict., editors can
> > leave backup files, etc. My view is that you should be explicit
> about what
> > you want copied into the build area.
> >
> > Of course, we could go for a backwards compatible attribute to
> control the
> > behaviour
> >
> > <javac copysupport="false" ...>
> >
> > Each such option, however, adds to ant's complexity. It may be better to
> > reduce optionality rather than increase it.
> >
> > Conor
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Twiggs, Glenn [mailto:Glenn_Twiggs@bmc.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, 7 March 2000 9:06
> > > To: 'ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org'
> > > Subject: RE: Unbundling copying support files from the javac task
> > >
> > >
> > > The "copying support files" feature is one of the selling-points
> > > of ANT (at
> > > least for me), that I don't need to know all the details
> about setting up
> > > the "classes" directory. I like that "javac" is totally
> self-contained. Is
> > > there a situation where you would want to compile classes but not
> > > copy over
> > > the .properties file(s) used by those classes?
> > >
> > > Glenn.
> > >
> > >
> > > From: Kuiper, Arnout [mailto:Arnout.Kuiper@nl.origin-it.com]
> > >
> > > > From: rubys@us.ibm.com [mailto:rubys@us.ibm.com]
> > > > What I would like to propose is that the function to copy
> > > > support files be
> > > > removed from javac.  People who desire the current level of
> > > > functionallity
> > > > could simply add a
> > > >    <copydir excludes="**/*.java">
> > > > task to their build.xml files
> > >
> > > +1 for me!
> > >
> > >   Arnout
> > >
> >
>
>
>


Mime
View raw message