Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-ant-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 13167 invoked from network); 23 Apr 2002 09:12:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 23 Apr 2002 09:12:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 16234 invoked by uid 97); 23 Apr 2002 09:12:06 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 16218 invoked by uid 97); 23 Apr 2002 09:12:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Ant Developers List" Reply-To: "Ant Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 16207 invoked from network); 23 Apr 2002 09:12:05 -0000 X-Authentication-Warning: bodewig.bost.de: bodewig set sender to bodewig@apache.org using -f To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org Subject: Re: RPMs References: From: Stefan Bodewig Date: 23 Apr 2002 11:12:04 +0200 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Lines: 15 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Civil Service) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Tue, 23 Apr 2002, Conor MacNeill wrote: > The consensus seems to be that we should not produce the RPMs in > Ant. I'm not sure. I'd prefer we build RPMs in Ant using a layout that is compatible with prior Ant RPM versions and doesn't contain anything we cannot fix ourselves. If this is not possible, then we shouldn't create RPMs at all and remove the whole RPM building stuff from Ant's build file (as well as the outdated spec file of course). Stefan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: