ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jose Alberto Fernandez" <j_a_fernan...@yahoo.com>
Subject RE: [SUBMIT] Ear.java task
Date Fri, 23 Mar 2001 14:33:14 GMT
I see no problem on having lots of tasks that do specialized work in one are
of the other. Why should everyone rediscover the wheel if we can just give
them one. These are the kinds of tasks that should be provided in separate
libraries. A J2EEtasklib for example, containing all these WAR EAR
deployment tools and so forth.

We get on these arguments because we are trying to control (maybe
administer) every single task ever written and offerd to the larger
comunity. That is unmanagable in the long run.

Jose Alberto

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Les Hughes [mailto:leslie.hughes@rubus.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2001 1:45 PM
> To: 'ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org'
> Subject: RE: [SUBMIT] Ear.java task
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> You could say the same thing about the WAR task and deprecate
> that but like
> I said, Ear just makes my life easier. I guess I look on JAR
> as low level
> and WAR and EAR as wrappers saving me the hassle of messing about with
> zipfilesets. But you're right, we could end up with a load of
> [A-Za-z]ar
> tasks.
>
> Bye,
>
> Les
>
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rosen, Alex [mailto:arosen@silverstream.com]
> > Sent: 20 March 2001 17:59
> > To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> > Subject: RE: [SUBMIT] Ear.java task
> >
> >
> > > > Not really anything wonderful, I've hacked together an Ear
> > > > task out of the
> > > > War task, basically because I'm too lazy to keep using
> > > > zipfilesets in Jar
> > > > ;-)
> >
> > Now that we have zipfilesets, do we really need tasks for
> EARs, client
> > application JARs (CARs), resource adapter JARs (RARs), and
> > anything else Sun
> > comes up with? Doesn't seem worth it to me...
> >
> > Alex
> >
>


Mime
View raw message