axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sam Ruby <>
Subject Re: cvs commit: xml-axis/java buildTest.xml
Date Tue, 23 Jul 2002 19:50:06 GMT
Steve Loughran wrote:
>>I'll continue to vote -0 for a ant 1.5 for a completely nontechnical,
>>selfish reason:  WebSphere.  The WebSphere production build uses ant 1.4.
>>We treat AXIS as a prereq, so it's not an issue now; but if the day ever
>>came when we had to build AXIS in our production build (can't imagine why)
>>then we'd have to recreate the 1.4 build files.  You may ask, "Why can't
>>WebSphere move to ant 1.5?"  Silly question!  This is a production build
>>we're talking about.  Change is glacial:  inches a year unless suddenly a
>>whole berg breaks away.  It seems likely that this is a situation that
>>others besides WebSphere may face.
> See ant in anger by one S. loughran:
> in the section: 'Ant Update Policies'
> " including ant.jar and related files in the CVS tree helps ensure that old
> versions of your software can be still be built. "
> I think building old code with old version of ant is the entirely correct
> approach, which is precisely why big in-house projects should keep ant in
> clearcase, CVS, or whatever. Take modify it to use WS_ANT_HOME as
> the ant home variable, rename it and tell people to invoke ant that
> way. We even had JDK versions under clearcase last project, for total
> control of what developers used (and more importantly, what operations
> installed).
> It is not too late to do this for your legacy project.

IMHO, you missed Russell's point.  Ant 1.4 may or may not be checked 
into its configuration management system (not CVS, but that's not 
important) - either way, doing such would not make it any easier for 
WebSphere to inhale the source for Axis into its build.  This is an 
option that Russell would like to preserve as long as reasonably possible.

- Sam Ruby

View raw message