ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jose Alberto Fernandez" <j_a_fernan...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: [PATCH] ant task with (nested) fileset(s)
Date Sat, 10 Nov 2001 12:11:23 GMT
From: "Peter Donald" <donaldp@apache.org>

> I am still fairly sure I don't like anton (or javaon) style functionality at 
> all. Basically it amounts to limited version of foreach where only one var 
> can change each iteration. I can't see how either can lead to good build 
> practices - anyone care to enlighten me ?
> 

In the case of <javaon> I agree with your argument (although there is still the issue
of
having allowed <execon> as part of ANT in the first place) those asking for <javaon>,
 I think are just asking for symmetry on the tasks provided by ANT.

With respect to <ant> (or <anton>) fileset functionality I disagree with your
assesment. 
The question is whether the best practice is to have to modify a main-buildfile everytime

a new subproject is added, or this can be done by simply installing the subproject in the

right location in the source tree.

For example in a project like tasklibs where you may have a large amount of quasi-independent
subproject may be a good example. Shall each library be build only independently? shall there
be
a main-build that needs to be modified every time a new taglib is added? or shall the main
build
simply pickup the new taglibs as they are added. Different build shops may want to be
able to use different policies on this regard and I do not see why one should be concidered
better or worst than any other. It is a question about how much centralized control a shop
wants to have of the build-process across an organization.

Jose Alberto



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:ant-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message