ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <nicola...@apache.org>
Subject Re: 1.6 milestones ?
Date Fri, 14 Mar 2003 21:56:04 GMT

Costin Manolache wrote, On 14/03/2003 19.02:
> Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> 
> 
>>Thanks Costin.
>>I also understand some of the philosophical arguments (not to become
>>scripting), but when you see how confusing a buildfile looks and how many
>>extra properties you need to add to the build just to avoid using <if>,
>>you undestand that it is really needed.
>>
>>The same argument can be made of the other tasks.
> 
> 
> I know. I'm using <if> and the other tasks. 
> 
> A lot of build files do a lot of ugly tricks to do ifs without <if>.
> 
> Maybe a good solution would be to just bundle the ant-contrib tasks with
> ant. 

And this is why I still like the idea of Centipede. Shall we remove that 
moniker and call it ant-distro? Fine with me :-)

> I think the large number of tasks and the release restrictions are a big
> problem for ant, and starting with 1.6 we should move to a more
> componentized approach - i.e. have some sets of tasks that can be released 
> independent of the ant main release.

+1

> I know few people may like the JDK1.4 approach ( "put everything in
> rt.jar"), but I think it would be better to have more flexibility.

Imagine a core ant, an ant-tasks project, and an ant-distro one.

That is, take current Ant, move all the optional tasks in ant-tasks, add 
to that Ruper and other current Centipede tasks, take Centipede and make 
that ant-distro.

So users that want a full-version take ant distro, those that want to 
create their distro can take from the core and the tasks.

What does this sound like?

-- 
Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nicolaken@apache.org
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------


Mime
View raw message