ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kev Jackson <>
Subject Re: AW: Global reply (Re: [VOTE-REPOST] Promote the Antunit Antlib out of the sandbox)
Date Mon, 14 Nov 2005 09:18:45 GMT

>>>Shall the svn antlib be promoted?
>[X] Yes (i.e. +1)
>    [X] and I want to become a committer to it [] No
>CVS* are core tasks and SVN is the follower. So we should have a
>standard solution.
I agree with this sentiment

>>>Shall the .NET antlib be promoted?
>[] Yes (i.e. +1)
>    [] and I want to become a committer to it [ ] No
>Dont know the antlib and dont know .NET - but I dont want to be a
>obstacle here.
>But: if we start with .NET, why not C/C++, Cobol, ... Maybe it would be
>in AntContrib?
>I see two ways:
>- Ant focuses on java language --> no .NET in Ant --> .NET in
>- Ant openes for other languages --> can we integrate AntContrib?
>  (just for strategic thoughts; license and commitership has to be
Given that there's already a NAnt for .Net development, and that 
Microsoft have decided to write their own build tool (MSBuild), I don't 
really see much point in having a .Net task for Ant.  I doubt very much 
that a pure .Net application would (and dev team) would install a JRE + 
Ant + .net antlib just to build their app, when:
a - using build tools anyway just isn't part of the Microsoft/.Net 
developer culture
b - there are other build tools available that don't require a JRE to be 
c - one of these build tools has been 'blessed' by Microsoft

The only usefulness in the ant lib would come when developing a 
cross-platform/multi-platform app where you want to build everything 
with one tool in which case Ant could be used to build for example a 
server side component in Java and a client side component in .net


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

View raw message