ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeffrey E Care <ca...@us.ibm.com>
Subject Re: NIO 2.0 == Ant 2.0? was Re: Java NIO support
Date Thu, 16 Feb 2012 00:05:41 GMT
Mansour Al Akeel <mansour.alakeel@gmail.com> wrote on 02/15/2012 02:05:28 
PM:

> Is there something wrong with antlib ? Would OSGI be more convenient and
> appealing for programmers to create and contribute their plugins rather
> than writing their own build system ? Derivatives of eclipse exists, but
> mainly they are just bundles of different plugins. Is this because it's
> OSGI ?

The only problem I have with the antlib mechanism is that you have to 
specifically call out the antlib(s) you want to use. That's not a problem 
in build.xmls, as I would think that most people would want the namespace 
binding; but consider things like version information & diagnostics 
providers: presently there's no hook for an antlib to contribute to the 
version information or diags, even if the JAR containing the antlib is in 
Ant's lib directory (or elsewhere on the classpath). Fortunately for these 
cases META-INF/services provides a good enough mechanism. I have a 
contribution for Ant that will add hook points for antlibs to contribute 
to the version info & diags but I can't seem to get it cleared through IBM 
legal :(

I don't know of a compelling reason to add a heavyweight plugin mechanism 
like OSGi.

--
JEC
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message