ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Joshua Davis" <jsd2...@bellatlantic.net>
Subject RE: Did somebody say Shut up and Write? :)
Date Thu, 21 Dec 2000 13:25:34 GMT
Jose,

Well put, thanks.  Being a newbie on this list, it may be that there is a
lot of implied context that I did not have when reading these two proposals.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jose Alberto Fernandez [mailto:JFernandez@viquity.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 2:40 PM
> To: 'ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org'
> Subject: RE: Did somebody say Shut up and Write? :)
>
>
> > From: Joshua Davis [mailto:jsd2000@bellatlantic.net]
> >
> >
> > I think the 'frantic' proposal has some good points, but the
> > risk of going
> > in this direction is that it may degenerate into a proposal
> > to create a
> > rule-based programming language.  I don't think there are
> > many build systems
> > written in Prolog. ;-> Coming from many years of developing
> > compiler-interpeter systems, I would say it would be a
> > mistake to turn ANT
> > into any kind of generic purpose programming / scripting
> > language.  ANT's
> > specificity is its utility, for me.
> >
>
> Maybe not build, but there are a few configuration systems (installers)
> that hide a Prolog engine inside so that peple don't get scared :-)
>
> > You may want to consider adoption factors when making these proposals.
> >
> > The 'target' and 'task' objects in the existing ANT implementation are
> > familiar to anyone who has used make.  While unifying all of
> > the objects is
> > 'neato', it won't do anything do drive the adoption of the tool.
> >
>
> But I do not think anyone is saying that at the user level (XML file)
> any of these things will change. The discussion is how they are
> treated internally during execution and that will only implact someone
> making changes to CORE, not even the writers of regular Tasks should be
> impacted by this.
>
> > Also consider this:
> > Installing / deploying is typically a separate process with different
> > requirements done by different people.  It's very tempting to
> > have the build
> > system deploy things as well (people try to deploy things
> > with CVS all the
> > time).
> >
>
> True, but given the amount of flexibility we have put in ANT it
> looks like real close to having most of the parts needed for a
> installer. True, most problaby the Javac task will not be used,
> and some other tasks will be required, but syntax, semantics,
> may be quite simillar. We would need a better GUI though :-)
>
> Jose Alberto
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ant-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>


Mime
View raw message