ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bruce Atherton <br...@callenish.com>
Subject Re: EasyAnt phases
Date Thu, 13 Nov 2008 19:08:49 GMT
Conceptually I agree with you, but I think we need to recognize why 
people would want this and to validate their concerns.

Consider these targets:

  <target name="full-build" depends="clean,compile,jar-files">...</target>
  <target name="update-build" depends="compile,jar-files">...</target>

Whether or not "clean" is a dependency of "compile" depends on the 
context "compile" is executed in. Now, it is possible to work around 
this but I am fairly sure that using dependencies as described above is 
a common implementation pattern for our users. I know that I have used 
it in the past, and probably will again. Sacrilege, I know. :-)

For this specific feature, though, I don't believe the target-group 
should have ordering added to it. Specifying an order would needlessly 
complicate the use of the feature, as well as promoting behaviour that 
we generally consider "bad" for build systems. Since there is a 
workaround (providing ordering through the dependency tree), I think the 
unordered solution is better.

But I wanted to make sure we fully understand the cost to our users of 
leaving it unordered.

Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>
> If you need a specific order of execution, you should ensure that your
> depends attributes are correct.  If target "a" must be run before
> target "b" than "b" simply must depend upon "a".
>
> This is true with normal targets and I don't see why target-groups
> would change that.
>
>   


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


Mime
View raw message