ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Erik Hatcher <>
Subject Re: Problems trying to generate xml help with xdoclet
Date Thu, 10 Apr 2003 01:42:25 GMT
On Wednesday, April 9, 2003, at 09:31  PM, Jesse Stockall wrote:
> Agreed, if optional attributes are the default, tagging the tasks will 
> be much simpler.

I think optional is more likely how things are than required - at least 
that's how I write my tasks.

>>   I'd prefer that we always use name="value" type of syntax, or 
>> simply the tag implying meaning with no attributes (@ant.required by 
>> itself, perhaps?).
> Hmmm, I don't mind '@ant.required', it's short and to the point, but 
> to be consistent with the groups, I'd prefer '@ant.attribute.required'
> What about the group tags? name="value"

No problem.  But tagging what is obviously an attribute 
[setSomething(...)] with a tag that says "attribute" in it seems a 
little redundant.  I'm just trying to be careful that we name things as 
succinctly as possible and don't violate the DRY (don't repeat 
yourself) principle.  It's easy for us to go nuts with tagging things, 
but the more carefully we do it the more clean and fun it will be! :)

Its hard for me to dedicate a lot of brain bandwidth to this right now 
though, so I'll just express mostly general opinions rather than hard 
technical details.  I like what you've done, and we're on the right 
track.  I think a lot of it will be a just-do-it approach and see how 
it goes, and then evolve the tags/descriptors as we see real-world 
issues appear.  We'll know first-hand when the tagging is becoming too 
laborious and will fix it as we see it happen.

> Well I keep XDoclet's CVS tree on disk, so it's not a big deal to hack 
> on the XDoclet side of things.  As you mentioned it will eventually be 
> maintained by the Ant team, so maybe it should be brought back sooner 
> rather than later.

Glad to have you on board as a committer, Jesse!  :))


View raw message