ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Conor MacNeill" <co...@cognet.com.au>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Task API
Date Tue, 17 Apr 2001 14:31:36 GMT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Donald" <donaldp@apache.org>
To: <ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Cc: <ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 11:39 PM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Task API


> At 10:42  17/4/01 +1000, Conor MacNeill wrote:
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Peter Donald" <donaldp@apache.org>
> >To: <ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> >Cc: <ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> >Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 9:09 PM
> >Subject: Re: [VOTE] Task API
> >
> >
> >> At 08:12  17/4/01 +1000, Conor MacNeill wrote:
> >> >> * tasks should have access to its own XML representation.
> >> >>
> >> >>   /Task Object Model instead of XML representation/
> >> >
> >> >-1.
> >>
> >> How do you propose to do container tasks?
> >
> >What is a container task? (I could guess, just want to be clear)
>
> Tasks that contain other tasks (parralele/if/then/case/whatever).
>
> >Well, The requirement and how it is done are two separate things. I
don't
> >believe all tasks need to have access to their Task Object Model.
>
> agreed.
>
> >My idea
> >of container tasks is that there will be a separate interface
implemented
> >by those tasks which will give the container the definitions of the
> >contained tasks.
>
> precisely.
>
> >So, it may be required for some tasks, but not for all.
>
> So why did you -1 it? ;)

In general, I don't think a task should know about its configuration info
beyond its interface. It is up to the thing that contains the task to
configure the task. I don't think the task itself should reach "outside"
that boundary, if you know what I mean. Anyway, I don't think it is a
requirement for all tasks to have this information. Whether container tasks
need this information is not yet clear to me.

Conor




Mime
View raw message