Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-ant-user-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 14217 invoked from network); 1 Dec 2002 23:33:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 1 Dec 2002 23:33:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 2546 invoked by uid 97); 1 Dec 2002 23:34:12 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-ant-user@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 2510 invoked by uid 97); 1 Dec 2002 23:34:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ant-user-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Ant Users List" Reply-To: "Ant Users List" Delivered-To: mailing list ant-user@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 2498 invoked by uid 98); 1 Dec 2002 23:34:11 -0000 X-Antivirus: nagoya (v4218 created Aug 14 2002) Reply-To: From: "Scott Stirling" To: "Ant Users List" Subject: RE: Ant Perversions [was RE: Properties are causing problem in 1.5] Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 18:32:30 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > -----Original Message----- > From: Jon Skeet [mailto:jon.skeet@peramon.com] [...] > > 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 Ant. > 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: