ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Bodewig <>
Subject Re: [Ant2] Tasks as siblings of <target>
Date Fri, 19 Oct 2001 13:59:45 GMT
On Fri, 19 Oct 2001, Jose Alberto Fernandez <>

> I now see you were serious about your response to my other response
> ;-)

Did you expect anything else? 8-)

>> (1) Allow no tasks to be defined at the same level as <target>
>> (this is what Tim Dawson has proposed IIRC).
> When we say "no task" do we actually mean "nothing can be outside a
> target"?

This is where Peter's "datatype scoping needs to be defined" kicks in.
Personally, I don't want to distinguish between the definition of a
datatype and a task that does something else.

> I also think that if we adopt this proposal, the resulting pattern
> for buildfiles will be having all targets expressing dependency on
> one "init" target.

Which wouldn't be bad IMHO.

> So at the end we will finish with a very redundant pattern.

Why is that redundant?  It makes you think about which properties you
really need in a given target and may even lead to cleaner build


View raw message