Return-Path: 
 <ant-dev-return-12383-apmail-jakarta-ant-dev-archive=jakarta.apache.org@jakarta.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-ant-dev-archive@jakarta.apache.org
Received: (qmail 39411 invoked by uid 500); 3 Apr 2001 13:06:38 -0000
Mailing-List: contact ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
list-help: <mailto:ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:ant-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
list-post: <mailto:ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Received: (qmail 39402 invoked from network); 3 Apr 2001 13:06:38 -0000
Message-ID: <502326F46B08D41191C400508B6D70C1014B02A5@nvision01.rubus.com>
From: Les Hughes <leslie.hughes@rubus.com>
To: "'ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org'" <ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Subject: RE: continuing development for ant 1.4
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 12:29:50 +0100 
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Spam-Rating: h31.sny.collab.net 1.6.2 0/1000/N



Just my 2p.....

Hmm, removing WAR ? I know there's been some discussion about the use of
zipfilesets but doesn't this approach make things less easy for end users?
Personally, I prefer the 'clean' syntax of <war> but I guess as long as
there's a war, ear, rar, car example in the docs under jar then I suppose it
doesn't matter.

I'll resend ear in a mo.


Bye,

Les


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Donald [mailto:donaldp@apache.org]
> Sent: 03 April 2001 10:59
> To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: RE: continuing development for ant 1.4
> 
> 
> At 10:33  3/4/01 +0100, Les Hughes wrote:
> >It was pretty obvious that you guys had other things on your 
> minds recently
> >but when can we expect to see new 1.x tasks making it into 
> CVS - once all of
> >the discussion is over maybe? 
> 
> as soon as something gets enough votes. I only personally use a small
> subset of ant tasks and thus don't really feel confident 
> about checking in
> changes without someone else checking it. Whenever I ask for 
> other people
> to check it no one does ... hence it doesn't get added ;)
> 
> >In my case, I'm waiting on a decision on <ear>
> 
> If you want it then I will add it in but there was concern 
> that it is no
> longer needed. Resend it and if no one -1s it then I will check it in.
> 
> >and more importantly, Kirk's <p4counter>.
> 
> no idea about that ;)
> 
> >Also, I was wondering will 'old' 1.x tasks will need to be 
> ported to 2.x
> >sometime in the not to distant future? 
> 
> I would more say "distant" future as we haven't even got into 
> design phase
> of ant2 so ... ;)
> 
> >I'd like to start thinking about
> >cleaning up the P4 stuff, in particular around the use (or 
> not) of Oro for
> >regexp matching in p4base but I'd rather wait for the 2.x 
> framework to be a
> >little firmer before starting if it'll require task re-writes.
> 
> rewrite it now if you want ;)
> 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               |
> *-----------------------------------------------------*
>