Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Ant Developers List" <dev@ant.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of ddevienne@gmail.com designates
 64.233.170.204 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-priority:x-msmail-priority:x-mailer:in-reply-to:x-mimeole:importance;
        b=tyHDxGqechX86amEIplvIXQRB2MJcuhvkg3fsoUOad6Tbm0BqfZB5hjsy1KmecjQbDTte6t4XSs31JMOLUjbprFBG1hNbI82M0SzvYA4NiNnTDy8F+UzW7IVj3quv3y0tuugFtfxRK0qzfuOTCEat/UAoY24qHCWtaoQJXTzxDc=
From: "Dominique Devienne" <ddevienne@gmail.com>
To: "'Ant Developers List'" <dev@ant.apache.org>
Subject: RE: antlib loading in typedef
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 09:26:00 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <A672996F85AA7240A9DD2A455BD0D428FA6F8B@HOUEXCH902.Landmark.lgc.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In-Reply-To: <430AFBFD.10004@apache.org>
Importance: Normal

> From: Steve Loughran [mailto:stevel@apache.org]
> One change I have also checked in to Definer.java is some extra logic
> for naming antlibs. Instead of just
>=20
> 	antlib:org.example.package
>=20
> you can go
>=20
> 	antlib://org/example/package/file.xml
>=20
> and have that file's declarations read in. This will let me keep a set
> of antlibs in a single dir, load it with -lib and then have
>=20
> antlib://m2-macros.xml
> antlib://sf-macros.xml
>=20
> So, I am clearly +1 in having this feature. What I am 0 about is the
> exact syntax. Should it be a full path like what I have done, or =
should
> it be
>=20
> antlib://org.example.package/file.xml
> antlib:org.example.package/file.xml
> antlib://org.example.package/antlib.xml
>=20
> In which case, the antlib.xml is just something we patch in on the end
> if there is no /*.xml file defined at the tail.
>=20
> Thoughts?

I guess you did go more into the use case, after your commit ;-)

I'm still not sure I fully follow your logic... but it sounds like you =
want
to load some macros by (ab?)using the antlib mechanism??? Why not simply =
use
<import> to load target-less builds with macro definitions?

Auto-downloading tasks (instead of push, I much prefer pull, where you =
fail
asking the user to run a given target to do the download explicitly) can =
be
handled just the same with an imported build file, no?

The one think your current use of antlib with -lib gives you is the =
ability
to locate the resource dynamically using the classpath. This could and
probably should be handled using an import path (kind of like a vpath) =
that
<import> could use, no? I think this feature has been requested before. =
It
would avoid me having to use an env. var. to locate the imported file as
well.

Like I said in my other message, I think we should reserve the antlib
loading mechanism for load task collection just in the usual way, and =
use
<import>, possibly enhanced, to support what I believe you want.

Thoughts? --DD


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