Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-ant-user-archive@ant.apache.org Received: (qmail 35040 invoked by uid 500); 11 Jun 2003 17:16:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@ant.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 user@ant.apache.org Received: (qmail 35020 invoked from network); 11 Jun 2003 17:16:04 -0000 Received: from 75.209.219.209.transedge.com (HELO ckmso2.proxy.att.com) (209.219.209.75) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 11 Jun 2003 17:16:04 -0000 Received: from attrh0i.attrh.att.com ([135.37.94.54]) by ckmso2.proxy.att.com (AT&T IPNS/MSO-5.0) with ESMTP id h5BH3Ara009906 for ; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 13:16:08 -0400 Received: from acclust02evs1.ugd.att.com (135.37.16.8) by attrh0i.attrh.att.com (6.5.019) id 3EDA245800251FC3; Wed, 11 Jun 2003 13:15:52 -0400 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6375.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: Re[2]: Separation from rules and project specifics. Can it be done? Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 13:16:06 -0400 Message-ID: <126C77D3993DC640B8C9012D54A3C46004DAA3FA@ACCLUST02EVS1.ugd.att.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Re[2]: Separation from rules and project specifics. Can it be done? Thread-Index: AcMwM8FPnBk/pszuQtuqPaTLdRXg0QAB4ggg From: "Tharp, Joshua L, SOLGV" To: "Ant Users List" , "pkriens" X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Five comments, three about your questions, two about your posts... 1) Use the ant task to break your build files up into reusable pieces. 2) The ant task can be populated using properties files addressing your concerns. 3) Ant, like make, any programming language, and just about anything else done on a computer, CAN require large amounts of maintenance, CAN become unreadable, and CAN be sensitive to configuration. However, like all of these things, knowing what you are doing alleviates or even eliminates these problems. I have used and even written, some very fragile make files in the past. On the other hand, I have written some fairly clean, clear, and flexible make and ant files. It is a simple matter of education and experience. If you are new to ant, get a good book that explains how to produce good build environment. 4) IMHO is a STUPID thing to put in your messages since we all know it is your opinion, and it obviously isn't humble or you wouldn't be sharing it with us. 5) I'm sorry if you are feeling pressure to use ant. If you don't like the way it works, you have three choices, use make or one of its clones, write your own build tool, or become a contributor to ant. I don't mind answering questions, and reading other's questions / answers, but the ant tool bashing that has taken place on the list over the last two days is beyond tiresome. Josh -----Original Message----- From: Peter Kriens [mailto:Peter.Kriens@aQute.se]=20 Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 9:08 AM To: Sauyet, Scott (OTS-HAR) Cc: user@ant.apache.org Subject: Re[2]: Separation from rules and project specifics. Can it be done? The problem with the entity solution is that it only works from the first file. You cannot do includes in includes ... Another issue is, is that the location cannot come from properties because it is on XML level. You are only allowed to define the entity BEFORE any text is processed. Really rather limited actually. I agree it is a start, but as with many things in Ant, it stops short from really being adequate. Dont get me wrong, thousands of developers prove every day ant can do the job ... but imho at the cost of high maintenance because of unreadability, sensitive to configuration, and its ad-hoc design. Kind regards, Peter Kriens --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@ant.apache.org