ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Corey Jewett ...@syntheticplayground.com>
Subject Re: Ant 1.6 local and macrodef attributes
Date Wed, 26 Nov 2003 16:51:45 GMT
+1. In my initial forays with macrodef I ran headfirst into the 
set-only-once property issue. My vote is also one of the 6 on bugzilla.

The lack of local properties (of any kind) is like having a badly 
sprained ankle. You can still get there, but it's slower and a lot more 
painful.

Corey


On Wednesday, November 26, 2003, at 05:56 AM, Jacob Kjome wrote:

>
> Hi Stefan,
>
> I doubt many in the community are currently using <macrodef> so I'm 
> not sure I'd point to lack of community support when saying whether or 
> not to include <local> functionality in <macrodef>.  There are 
> currently 6 votes for the <local> patch in Bugzilla.  See..
> http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=23942
> http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/showvotes.cgi?bug_id=23942
>
> My vote is one of them.  Whether the current patch or another one is 
> decided upon, we need some sort of local property functionality in 
> order to make <macrodef> moderately useful.  If this is left out of 
> Ant-1.6, <macrodef> will be all but crippled and will hardly serve as 
> an replacement for <antcall>.
>
> I urge you and the other committers to either reconsider your votes 
> for letting <local> into Ant-1.6 or come up with an equivalent 
> (better) solution.  Either way, we need *a* solution that provides 
> this functionality.  IMHO, you might as well remove <macrodef> from 
> Ant-1.6 if you aren't going to allow for local properties.
>
> Jake
>
> At 12:09 PM 11/26/2003 +0100, you wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 Nov 2003, peter reilly <peter.reilly@corvil.com> wrote:
>> > a)
>> > I sent a vote last week on local properties
>> > and the result was:
>> >                            committers  others (+ votes in bugzilla)
>> >    have local in ant 1.6   2           1 + 6
>> >    not                     0           0
>> >    +0                      1           0
>> >
>> > Based on this and other feedback I think that local does
>> > belong in ant 1.6.
>>
>> I agree with your opinion (that locals should be there, after all I'm
>> one of the two +1s), but disagree with the conclusion that this is
>> going to happen.  2 +1s is simply not enough to make a vote pass.
>>
>> I'm not trying to argue from a procedural standpoint but merely from
>> the fact that a change like this needs community support - and it
>> doesn't seem to have it.
>>
>> > b)
>> > I send an vote the week before about local properties being
>>
>> s/local properties/macrodef attributes/
>>
>> > implemented by textual replacement or by using local properties.
>> > The result was:
>> >
>> >                            committers  others
>> >    local properties        2           1
>> >    textual replacement     1           4
>> >    +0                      1           0
>> >
>> > I would like to implement attributes using local properties,
>>
>> -0.8
>>
>> most if not all things that could be done when we implement the
>> attributes as local properties are possible with textual expansion.
>> Textual expansion enables things that local properties don't.
>>
>> > I propose to commit local properties and implement attributes using
>> > local properties for the ant 1.6 beta3 release.
>>
>> -1 on both.  Both parts lack committer support.  We could try to
>> revote or something.
>>
>> Stefan
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@ant.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@ant.apache.org
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-help@ant.apache.org


Mime
View raw message