ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dominique Devienne" <DDevie...@lgc.com>
Subject RE: FileSets with optional basedir and absolute paths for includes
Date Wed, 09 Mar 2005 16:09:08 GMT
> From: Matt Benson [mailto:gudnabrsam@yahoo.com]
> --- Peter Reilly <peterreilly@apache.org> wrote:
> > The fact that a fileset has a directory base is I
> > think its basic design.
> 
> I like mappers, don't get me wrong, but I have the
> general feeling that different tasks may not always
> use them the same way.  I usually find myself having
> to play a little to create a mapper to do exactly what
> I want.  This would be the same thing.  Your filenames
> are no longer relative; so what?  Especially with the
> container and chained mappers... if I have a fileset
> rooted in ten different directories, even on different
> roots (where available) I can set up a container
> mapper to map each of them appropriately.

I agree with Peter. I don't like this.

I'm all for a true File Set datatype with no basedir,
but not for retrofitting FileSet into this concept.

Just create such a new type, like <filebag>, which
accepts nested filesets if you want, and adapt tasks
can that conceptually deal with plain absolute file
names, and leave the others alone dealing with FileSet.

I'm balancing between a -1 and a -0 on this one... --DD

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


Mime
View raw message