ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jose Alberto Fernandez <JFernan...@viquity.com>
Subject RE: Content in tags
Date Fri, 08 Dec 2000 20:43:44 GMT
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
> 
> 
> Peter Donald <donaldp@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> >>But the classpath child shows an area where allowing both, child
> >>elements and content might be useful - say I wanted to add a
> >>classpath child to script so that I can point the task to bsf.jar
> >>and don't need to put it into ANT_HOME/lib or similar.
> > 
> > I still think it would be better to seperate them out. Something
> > like
> > 
> > <script language="blah">
> >   <classpath ref=".." />
> >   <logic>
> >    call myScriptTask();
> >   </logic>
> > </script>
> 
> I know this is the alternative and I could live with it. 
> 
> In the <sql> example it means the user would always have to specify
> <transaction> explicitly, which might make him aware that there is an
> transaction involved in the first place (which would be a good thing).
> 

Notice that <transaction> I think means the driver is on autocommit=false
(actually I am not sure, but that was the intent). So having or not
having the transaction element makes a difference.

Second, with the case of <classpath> in point. What you suggest will
mean that if we do not add a <classpath> element from the begining
to any task someone defines, there is no way to add it afterwards 
without breaking al previous usage because now you need to use
some other element that wasn't needed before.

That to me is really really bad.
 
I would suggest not being too anal (;-)) about this kind of multiple text
and let the task decide whether:

addText() means replace, contatenate, or fail is already set.

We shouldn't be in the task meaning bussiness.

Jose Alberto

Mime
View raw message