ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steve Loughran <ste...@apache.org>
Subject Re: <ant> and basedir
Date Fri, 05 Sep 2008 10:47:13 GMT
Dominique Devienne wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 8:48 AM, Stefan Bodewig <bodewig@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Now if only <import> would work the same ;-)
>> We disagree here.
> 
> Definitely. Just the fact that you documented the whole mess about
> <*ant*>'s basedir nightmare is enough of a hint to me that not doing
> the obvious is a mistake. Resolution relative to the current file, or
> relative to what the current file explicitly says it should be, is
> always tons better than via something you don't control. It's simply
> more natural, the least surprising, etc... That's how HTML resolves
> things, XSL, etc...
> 
>> Writing ${basedir}/ in front of every location in
>> the imported file would be pretty tedious.  IMHO it is far more common
>> that you want files resolved relative to basedir than relative to the
>> location of the imported file.
> 
> Builds always rely on tons a properties to this dir or that dir
> anyway, and imported build files typically make assumptions about the
> properties they depend on, to be set by the importer somehow.
> 
> But anyhow, I've lost this argument then, and sounds like I'm loosing
> it now. It's too bad, as it's the simpler, least surprising behavior,
> to always resolve relative to the current file. I'm 100% sure of that.
> Saving a few keystrokes is a mistake if it goes away from the simple
> choice. But 'nough said ;-)
> 

One thing I think matters is that complex builds work under eclipse. 
Right now if you build stuff with <import> it doesnt. I don't think this 
is basedir related, but more the way import doesnt use it...

-steve



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


Mime
View raw message