ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org>
Subject Re: continuing development for ant 1.4
Date Wed, 04 Apr 2001 08:56:48 GMT
Jose Alberto Fernandez <j_a_fernandez@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
>>
>> Les Hughes <leslie.hughes@rubus.com> wrote:
>>
>> > In my case, I'm waiting on a decision on <ear>
>>
>> Honestly, I'm closer to removing <war> than adding <ear> - if it
>> wasn't for backwards compatibility.
>>
> 
> Stefan, can you explain why you feel this way?

Before people start to explain the benefits of <war> to me, I'd better
say that I really like this task and use it a lot - just look at the
@author tag in War.java and you'll know ;-)

Well, the reason I'd rather remove <war> is that there will be coming
a whole lot of <?ar> tasks that extend <jar> in the same way.  

This is great and I really appreciate the additional syntax checking
they'll provide and all this, but they are special purpose tasks.  As
such, they shouldn't be part of the set of core tasks - this is true
for a whole bunch of other tasks in Ant's CVS as well.  In retrospect,
I regret that I didn't put War.java into the optional package.

By adding more and more special purpose tasks now - read before we
really have some means to deal with non-core tasks - will make it more
difficult to decide which tasks should be part of the core and which
should be moved into separate task libraries - at least I fear this
will be the case.

This is not much more than an uneasy feeling - and I'm far from
forcing Pete to remove the task now that he has committed it as I
could by vetoing his commit (at least temporary, until he wears me
down 8-).

> Maybe they should be moved to the infamous contribution area.

Once it is there, yes. But I think the contribution area doesn't make
too much sense before we have the task library concept ready.

Stefan

Mime
View raw message