Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-ant-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 62016 invoked from network); 14 May 2002 11:07:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 14 May 2002 11:07:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 26893 invoked by uid 97); 14 May 2002 11:07:56 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 26837 invoked by uid 97); 14 May 2002 11:07:55 -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 25692 invoked by uid 98); 14 May 2002 11:02:51 -0000 X-Antivirus: nagoya (v4198 created Apr 24 2002) Message-ID: <3CE0EED2.7060806@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 13:02:42 +0200 From: Christian Neumann User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.9) Gecko/20020311 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, de-de MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org Subject: Re: Annoncement text for 1.5beta1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N I just want to ask if including the optional.jar file in the binary ant distribution will be the default way in the future? Because this seems to break the easy way described in http://jakarta.apache.org/ant/faq.html#delegating-classloader in dealing with external libraries. Including the optional.jar in the binary distribution makes it mandatory to modify the standard ant installation (either by adding all external libs in the ant/lib dir, the system classpath or by invoking ant with an own start script). For 1.4 it was simple to define the build environment of a project simply by declaring a standard ant installation as a minimum requirement. It was not necessary to extend the ant/lib dir, because (almost) all the external libs used by the optional tasks could be loaded with one taskdef statement from the project build file. I am aware of the other threads dealing with an include- or template-mechanismen and I don�t want to start yet another one. I just want to know if you activly decided that the easier way of installing ant is better than reducing the use of the "delegating-classloader"-concept? Thanks, christian On Thu, 2 May 2002, GOMEZ Henri wrote: > The suggestion was to split optional in free/non-free package. No, split into one jar per dependency, but this is not going to happen before Ant 1.6. > So if I release a rpm, it will be with a partial optional jar and > you'll get users complaining about 'incorrect rpm'. People have been complaining about not including optional.jar in the binary distributions, that's why it is now in. Maybe we should also provide it as a separate download for people building from source themselves? Stefan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: