ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Enhance chgrp/chown?
Date Fri, 23 May 2003 06:14:32 GMT
On Thu, 22 May 2003, Gus Heck <gus-antdev@cognition.olin.edu> wrote:
> Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>> On Wed, 21 May 2003, Gus Heck <gus-antdev@cognition.olin.edu>
>> wrote:

>>>Another logicical addition to all 3 of them might be allowing
>>>dirsets.
>> I think the type="dir" attribute covers this, doesn't it?
> 
> I guess multiple ways of doing things just isn't popular with anyone
> around here.

Uhm, Perl used to be my favorite scripting language for quite some
time.  But probably not because of TIMTOWTDI 8-)

If there is an existing way to do a thing I have no problem with
adding another way if it improves consistency accross tasks.  But
there are not that many tasks supporting <dirset> (yet?).

> Makes me wonder why we have dirsets at all if we can't use them
> here, and only in a narrow way for subant...

The main reason for <dirset> has been as a nested element in <path>.

> I suppose type="dir" is a pre-dirset feature on chmod,

Yes.

> These tasks are not yet released, so maybe they should take DirSets
> instead?

They inherit it from ExecuteOn, so they cannot un-use the attribute
(well, they could override the setter and throw an exception).

> Maybe fileset should have had a type="dir|file|both" instead of
> having Dirsets.

<fileset> always does the implict type="both" - it is the task that
decides whether it invokes getIncludedFiles or
getIncludedDirectories.  Take a look at the code of FileSet and
DirSet, they are identical.

We considered making dirsets and filesets interchangeable by having
dirset return the included directories in getIncludedFiles but decided
against it - not just because it was hackish but also because tasks
might rely on the fact that getIncludedFiles returns files and not
directories.

> What direction should I be taking with chgrp/chown here?

Thinking about it a second time - add <dirset> support to ExecuteOn.

> Given the constraints of back compatability, it seems that the only
> way to make life easy for the user is keep adding the new ways of
> referencing things (ie dirsets) to the old tasks in which they make
> sense.

True.

> ok I understand. Have you found out anything about tandem/nonstop
> and chgrp chown yet?

No, sorry.  I'll keep you posted.

Stefan

Mime
View raw message