ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Scott Stirling" <>
Subject RE: Ant Perversions [was RE: Properties are causing problem in 1.5]
Date Sun, 01 Dec 2002 23:32:30 GMT
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jon Skeet []
> In the build procedure at work, due to historical reasons I
> *only* use Ant for VSS work - simply because it's much better at
> getting the job done than anything else is, and *much* better
> than hand labelling lots of projects.

I've never used VSS, so I'll take your word for it.  I hear it's a crummy
SCM tool.  Why do people use it?  Believe me, I wonder how the hell
StarTeam, which sucks compared to Perforce or even CVS IMNSHO, got
entrenched at where I work.  Happened before my time.

> The .NET tasks aren't necessarily interactive, or controlling
> GUIs or anything else.

This has puzzled me for a while, so I might as well ask -- why if you are
developing for .NET, which isn't cross-platform, would you use a Java tool
to do your builds?  Does .NET really not provide a quality set of build and
automation tools?  Or are they too expensive to buy?  I don't get this one
at all, but there must be a reason if .NET tasks made it into the optional
task set.

> Similarly telnet is fine when it's doing *exactly* what you
> expect it to - and the build can fail if you don't get the
> response you're expecting.

That's cool, and I think a Java implementation of telnet is used anyway in

> If you could give better alternatives for all of the tasks which
> you think Ant is no good at, it would make your case a lot stronger.

I thought I did -- grep, sed and sh are three ubiquitous tools that do stuff
Ant's not good at (piping, stream editing, return codes, looping, no
compilation or packaging necessary).

Scott Stirling

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

View raw message