ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From bugzi...@apache.org
Subject DO NOT REPLY [Bug 8895] - ant and/or antcall should support forking
Date Fri, 27 May 2005 00:29:48 GMT
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG·
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8895>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND·
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=8895


jglick@netbeans.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jglick@netbeans.org




------- Additional Comments From jglick@netbeans.org  2005-05-27 02:29 -------
In most (all?) cases where I thought I needed this for scripts I work on, I
found some other way around it. But it could make some things easier.

Forking a new VM might not be necessary for some uses. E.g. sometimes you want
to invoke a child Ant script *without* user-set (-D...) properties.
inherit*="false" does not help here; you just cannot get rid of them.

Should the child script inherit the parent's listeners and loggers?

Probably should be deferred until a more concrete set of use cases is collected,
with reasons why you cannot solve the problem in a straightforward way without
the enhancement.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

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


Mime
View raw message