Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-ant-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 70766 invoked from network); 11 May 2005 12:50:34 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 11 May 2005 12:50:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 42339 invoked by uid 500); 11 May 2005 12:54:13 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-ant-dev-archive@ant.apache.org Received: (qmail 42272 invoked by uid 500); 11 May 2005 12:54:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Ant Developers List" Reply-To: "Ant Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list dev@ant.apache.org Received: (qmail 42247 invoked by uid 99); 11 May 2005 12:54:12 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from bodewig.bost.de (HELO bodewig.bost.de) (62.96.16.111) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Wed, 11 May 2005 05:54:11 -0700 Received: (from bodewig@localhost) by bodewig.bost.de (8.11.6/8.11.6) id j4BCoPW29425; Wed, 11 May 2005 14:50:25 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: bodewig.bost.de: bodewig set sender to bodewig@apache.org using -f To: dev@ant.apache.org Subject: Re: [patch] FTP.java - adding support for new features in commons-net 1.4.0 and performance improvement X-Draft-From: ("nnfolder:mail.jakarta-ant" 68382) References: <4281F193.1060608@javactivity.org> From: Stefan Bodewig Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 14:50:25 +0200 In-Reply-To: <4281F193.1060608@javactivity.org> (Steve Cohen's message of "Wed, 11 May 2005 06:50:43 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) XEmacs/21.4.17 (Jumbo Shrimp, linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Wed, 11 May 2005, Steve Cohen wrote: > I recently spent some time looking over jpackage.org. Have you guys > seen this operation? More than that. We modified the Ant wrapper script to suit their needs, so that they could stop distributing their version, for example. We've had some fruitful collaboration in the past. I used to be subscribed to their dev list but had to cut down on activities, so I dropped out of it. > They don't like builds that depend on downloading stuff from the > internet. Etc. They hate circular dependencies. Like me ;-) > They're somewhat annoyed with Ant. It's hard to talk to them. I've not seen that, if so, something must have changed over the past six months. Anything special? > In that world, they have a heck of a time building Ant from source > since Ant (its optional tasks, anyway) depend on things like > commons-net, which depend on Ant to build. Chicken-egg again. Not really. They have separate RPMs for Ant and for ant with optional tasks. You only need the Ant RPM to build commons-net, and you need Ant and commons-net to build the ant-apache-commons-net RPM. > It seems to me that Ant is really at least two beasts: > > 1. a tool for running strictly java compiles and packaging into > jars, wars, etc. But everybody will have a different opinion what makes up this core. ? You bet. ? For those RPM builders probably yes. ? _I_ don't think so. > (this may or may not equate exactly to Ant's core vs. optional tasks > - e.g. why is cvs core, but other vcs optional?) historical reasons. was there before any optional task came along. I guess