Mailing-List: contact ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Message-ID: <635802DA64D4D31190D500508B9B04104E101C@dcsrv0>
From: Jose  Alberto Fernandez <JFernandez@viquity.com>
To: "'ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org'" <ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Optional Tasks
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 13:06:16 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

> From: Siberski, Wolf [mailto:Wolf.Siberski@tui.de]
> 
> 
> > Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> > > From: Siberski, Wolf [mailto:Wolf.Siberski@tui.de]
> [snip]
> > > E.g., we could have
> > > anttasks.jar      all tasks needed to build ant
> > 
> > -1, the definition cannot be "what is needed to build ANT". 
> Is has to be
> > based on what is needed to build a reasonable application 
> that does not
> > require some external or optional tool during the build process.
> > Using ANT as an approximation is one thing, but it cannot 
> be the begining
> > and end. In particular, what do you mean by building ANT? 
> just CORE or 
> > the whole of ANT (optionals included)?
> 
> Just core. But why do You bother? If You want to build Ant, You'll 
> download anttasks.jar. If You want to build EJBs, You'll download just
> ejbtasks.jar. If You want to build foos, You'll download footasks.jar.
> No Ant user would be forced to use the task collection designed
> for Ant developers.
> I'm sure we won't be able to agree about what "is needed to build
> a reasonable application...", so my goal is to avoid this
> discussion by providing several (overlapping) task collections 
> which are targeted to different application types / Ant user types. 
> 

I have very little to disagree with you. I think we are in the same
wave length here. I am just trying to be precise on the issue of
CORE. Why, because once it becomes gospel, I see perfectly general
purpose tasks being forbidden from CORE because building ANT does 
not require them. 

So I am battling for a more, eventhough subjective, open standard.

With respect to overlapping jars, I do not think I like that.
Why because in a centralized environment you may have different
users with different needs. As long as things are additive
there is ussually little risk for bad clashes.

But, I am all for defining collections of tasks.

Jose Alberto


> Wolf
>