ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jose Alberto Fernandez" <j_a_fernan...@yahoo.com>
Subject RE: New rmic factory
Date Sat, 17 Mar 2001 17:21:03 GMT
Why is wrong with using <taskdef> to achieve that?


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken Wood [mailto:kwood@i2.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 10:52 PM
> To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: Re: New rmic factory
> 
> 
> Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > * There is a lot - and I mean it - cut/paste reuse between the javac
> >   and the rmic classes. Especially CLASSPATH creation and 
> handling of
> >   extdirs - this should be factored into a different place IMHO.
> > 
> > Stefan
> > 
> > 
> 
> Actually, this cuts to one of the Ant 1.2 requirements I want 
> to propose 
> - and maybe
> it's already covered. The requirement is that Ant provide a 
> good API and 
> VERY GOOD
> documentation on it's use so that tasks don't have so much cut and 
> pasted code scattered
> across the tasks. I have NOT looked at the 1.3 source much, 
> and the 1.2 
> only some,
> but every time I try to figure things out by looking at several 
> diffeerent tasks, I seem
> to see similar or identical code doing the same stuff in multiple 
> places. This makes it hard
> to re-use, and it must make maintenance a nightmare. Especially 
> important are the things
> that are needed by many tasks - dealing with CLASSPATHS, dealing with 
> filesets, patternsets,
> etc.
> 
> Another requirement, which I believe has been covered, but 
> I'll mention 
> for insurance sake, is
> the ability to add new tasks to ant by some type of 'drop in' 
> or 'plug 
> in' mechanism that is simple
> and clean. Having to edit default.properties and re-build the 
> jars just 
> to get a new task to appear
> built in is not ideal...
> 


Mime
View raw message