Return-Path: 
 <dev-return-47866-apmail-ant-dev-archive=ant.apache.org@ant.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-ant-dev-archive@ant.apache.org
Received: (qmail 21864 invoked by uid 500); 9 Jul 2003 06:54:31 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:dev-subscribe@ant.apache.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-help@ant.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@ant.apache.org>
List-Id: "Ant Developers List" <dev.ant.apache.org>
Reply-To: "Ant Developers List" <dev@ant.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@ant.apache.org
Received: (qmail 21848 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2003 06:54:31 -0000
Received: from bodewig.bost.de (62.96.16.111)
  by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 9 Jul 2003 06:54:31 -0000
Received: (from bodewig@localhost)
	by bodewig.bost.de (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h696sgW27583;
	Wed, 9 Jul 2003 08:54:42 +0200
X-Authentication-Warning: bodewig.bost.de: bodewig set sender to
 bodewig@apache.org using -f
To: dev@ant.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Patch] keep-alive feature
References: <FCA94FF996325842AACD9E80DBC2CA1F05F5F98A@exch-sl02.mdli.com>
From: Stefan Bodewig <bodewig@apache.org>
Date: 09 Jul 2003 08:54:41 +0200
In-Reply-To: <FCA94FF996325842AACD9E80DBC2CA1F05F5F98A@exch-sl02.mdli.com>
Message-ID: <m3ptkk8a1a.fsf@bodewig.bost.de>
Lines: 21
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Portable Code)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Alexey Solofnenko <A.Solofnenko@mdl.com> wrote:

> Actually the reason to implement keep-alive (originally keep-going)
> is to find as many problems as possible. It is done by executing all
> targets that do not depend directly or indirectly on failed
> targets. It is not fail-on-error flag - the build will still fail.

OK, I agree that we are talking about different things, then.

keep-going seems a better name, not sure whether it is the best
possible name (I've always been extremely bad with names and Ant has
suffered from this several times 8-).

I'm fine with the revised implementation as well. I'd print the
exception's stack trace with a debug or even verbose loglevel in the
catch block for those exceptions that will not be rethrown, though.

Maybe <ant>, <subant> and <antcall> (<*ant*>?) should get a new
attribute as well?

Stefan

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