ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dominique Devienne" <>
Subject RE: Where should the dotnet sandbox go?
Date Fri, 17 Sep 2004 14:09:17 GMT
Making it a separate AntLib makes a lot of sense to me too. So yeah,
(3) is the way to go, OTOH I'm not convinced it should be a fully
separate project within or outside the ASF.

I can foresee the not too distant future when these Ant sub-projects
will start having dependencies between each other, so compiling them
would either require (Maven + ibiblio (or an ASK equivalent)) or have
the sub-project check in the JARs they depend on (Uhhh!).

What I had in mind was more an antlibs/ sub-dir in Ant, which the Ant
build file could easily recurse into to build once it's own build is
complete. I already have the extension to subant to dynamically infer
the build order to use to call the sub-projects in a flexible way (all
you need is some XML file stating the sub-project's dependencies).

This model also allows to gradually move existing optional tasks out
of the main Ant src/ tree into their own AntLib (once we've switched
to SVN and can *move* files around the repo ;-)


> -----Original Message-----
> From: []
> Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 7:07 AM
> To:
> Subject: AW: Where should the dotnet sandbox go?
> On the same reasons I would say (3). Especially we had spoken about
> breaking Ant into modules and moving to SVN ... (last year at your home,
> Stefan :)
> I think a new subproject would be the right place because Ant targets a
> development
> with Java while these new tasks targets a development for .NET.
> Same as on Log4J/Log4C/... all under the logging-project, but individual
> subprojects.
> ... and ... why do we have a top level project ;-)
> It´s ever the same if a committer has an idea about an addition to Ant.
> So the only way is to ask the rest of committers.

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message