ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Hunter <jhun...@acm.org>
Subject Re: Ant build.xml
Date Tue, 04 Apr 2000 01:35:11 GMT
Kuiper, Arnout wrote:

> I agree. Personally I would go even further by having full blown
> releases. This makes Ant much more usable for the end-user. 

+1

It seems obvious to me that Ant should have full blown releases.  
I tell people about Ant all the time, people who have no interest in
servlets (gasp), and it seems clear they should be able to go get a
standard build of this nifty build tool.  I'd argue ant shouldn't
necessarily have the same release schedule as Tomcat, since it's already
being used far outside Tomcat-land.  Separate mailing list, separate
trees, separate releases.  (Provided, of course, someone is willing to
take the time to be release manager.)

Now, what to build Tomcat against?  The last stable ant version would
make sense, it helps Costin, and is what Cocoon and company would do. 
We can have a build-latest.xml that builds Tomcat with the latest Ant
(for testing and such), and a build.xml that builds with the latest
stable.

This will mean that the Tomcat tree will need to include an ant##.jar
representing the latest stable ant.  No more bootstrapping.  Maybe
that's a good thing?  :-)

Opinions?

-jh-

Mime
View raw message