ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jim Jackl-Mochel" <jmoc...@foliage.com>
Subject RE: [SUBMIT] Ear.java task
Date Fri, 23 Mar 2001 11:22:23 GMT
I agree. The fact that the WAR task is driven by the configuration file
simplifies things.

Jim JM

-----Original Message-----
From: Les Hughes [mailto:leslie.hughes@rubus.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 8:45 AM
To: 'ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org'
Subject: RE: [SUBMIT] Ear.java task



Hi,

You could say the same thing about the WAR task and deprecate that but like
I said, Ear just makes my life easier. I guess I look on JAR as low level
and WAR and EAR as wrappers saving me the hassle of messing about with
zipfilesets. But you're right, we could end up with a load of [A-Za-z]ar
tasks.

Bye,

Les




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rosen, Alex [mailto:arosen@silverstream.com]
> Sent: 20 March 2001 17:59
> To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [SUBMIT] Ear.java task
>
>
> > > Not really anything wonderful, I've hacked together an Ear
> > > task out of the
> > > War task, basically because I'm too lazy to keep using
> > > zipfilesets in Jar
> > > ;-)
>
> Now that we have zipfilesets, do we really need tasks for EARs, client
> application JARs (CARs), resource adapter JARs (RARs), and
> anything else Sun
> comes up with? Doesn't seem worth it to me...
>
> Alex
>


Mime
View raw message