Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-ant-dev-archive@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 5514 invoked by uid 500); 26 Mar 2001 09:48:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Delivered-To: mailing list ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 5503 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2001 09:48:26 -0000 Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20010326195034.00a88a60@alphalink.com.au> X-Sender: gdonald@alphalink.com.au X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 19:50:34 +1000 To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org From: Peter Donald Subject: Re: [SUBMIT] file set cullers Cc: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org In-Reply-To: <6p8obtse2a43pnmdudc2ueu5osbtk5tdd4@4ax.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spam-Rating: h31.sny.collab.net 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hi, Sorry for not getting back to you earlier. At 08:39 23/3/01 -0800, David Rees wrote: >Attached is my second cut at the culler functionality I mentioned >last week. It doesn't include HTML docs yet because I think text will >be easier to discuss. If you agree to the submission I can submit the >docs pretty quickly. > >As before, my thoughts for how this "should" be done in Ant2 will be >in different post (later). I just had a look at it and were wondering if you would consider waiting for ant2.0 to roll around. The reason is that I am reluctent to add anything new to ant1.x that we are not keeping in ant2. It is going to be hard enough for our users without this. What do you think ? Cheers, Pete *-----------------------------------------------------* | "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, | | and proving that there is no need to do so - almost | | everyone gets busy on the proof." | | - John Kenneth Galbraith | *-----------------------------------------------------*