ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Conor MacNeill" <co...@cortexebusiness.com.au>
Subject Re: [Proposal] Sandbox for Wayward Ant Tasks
Date Fri, 04 May 2001 15:33:46 GMT
Tim,

From: "Tim Vernum" <Tim.Vernum@macquarie.com.au>
>
> The commiters probably see less need for an "ant-contrib" module, since
they
> can commit any task they think is useful, but it should be clear to all,
that
> there are useful tasks that are not being accepted as part of ant.
>
> Even if these tasks don't fit the direct goals of ant, that doesn't mean
they
> should be lost.
>
> Other than the adminstration difficulties of managing a new cvs module,
what
> is the complaint against having a set of contrib tasks? It certainly
seems
> better than the alternative.

I voted against this concept, not because I don't believe in a task-contrib
area, but more because I think it is best to wait for Ant2 to provide the
appropriate mechanisms for this sort of thing. Once something like this
gets established, it is hard to take it away and say "Oh, we really should
be doing it this way."

In Ant2, adding tasks should be as simple as dropping in a .tsk file into
the appropriate directory. In Ant 1.x, you have to deal with taskdefs,
classpaths, changing defaults.properties, etc. That will add support load,
even in an unsupported contrib area.

So, as part of the Ant2 discussion, I voted to wait until Ant2 establishes
the right infrastructure. However, I can also see your points. So, I change
my -1 to a -0. If someone wants to setup and manage an unsupported
ant-contrib area for 1.x tasks, go ahead.

Conor



Mime
View raw message