Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 88899 invoked from network); 24 Jun 2002 07:24:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 24 Jun 2002 07:24:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 25992 invoked by uid 97); 24 Jun 2002 07:24:35 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 25919 invoked by uid 97); 24 Jun 2002 07:24:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 25907 invoked by uid 98); 24 Jun 2002 07:24:34 -0000 X-Antivirus: nagoya (v4198 created Apr 24 2002) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 03:24:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Henri Yandell X-X-Sender: To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Subject: Re: unmavenising Commons projects In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > > Just don't try to present ant as 'legacy' and replace the build.xml > > and the conventions we use with something else. > Who is? Where has someone declared ant as 'legacy'? And please tell me > about the consistent conventions used across commons.... My fault. I've been referring to the build.xml's that were replaced as legacy build.xml's that should be kept until we maven is at a point where we can consider standardising on it. Hen -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: