ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
Subject RE: Re: Feature Request: Ant batching support
Date Thu, 08 Mar 2001 14:31:06 GMT
I'm not sure if this got through last night (sent it from another email 
address...), so I'll say it again to ensure coverage.

I agree that the external entity solution would definitely work, and 
that it would in some ways be elegant in its simplicity, but I still 
have a few reservations:

1.  You're using a build file with a target "init", and you include a 
fragment that also has a target "init".  There's a problem.  While I 
understand that I'm partially shooting myself in the foot (I'm the only 
supporter of my project), I should ask if this doesn't seem like a 
maintenance nightmare for a project in which every developer manages 
the build file for his own packages?

2.  The syntax isn't exactly mainstream for Ant usage.  I hear everyone 
debating whether or not to support <include> tags, and in what form, 
and I think, 'If they don't like this level of ambiguity, how is the 
<DOCTYPE... solution acceptable?'  In short, I think the syntax could 
be better.

Ideally, Ant should support this level of modularity gracefully.  
Otherwise, it's only a pseudo-modular build tool. Just like 
cutting-and-pasting code from a Visual Basic template file into the 
current project, it's just not what I would term "correct". IMHO.


-----Original Message-----
From: bodewig []
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2001 1:36 AM
To: ant-dev
Cc: bodewig
Subject: Re: Feature Request: Ant batching support

John D. Casey <> wrote:

> The idea is to allow a template file equal access as the main build
> file to some environment.xml file that sets up tagdefs, file
> availability, and other properties, etc.

This is what you could do with an include, or am I missing something
(again 8-).

> I don't mean to be confrontational,

No problem - really. You don't get through as confrontational at all.

> I'm just not sure how I can be clearer about what I need...

I know what you mean.

Imagine you could include (forget the ugly entity syntax for a moment)
a fragmentary buildfile which contained property and taskdef tasks as
well as a target for other initial stuff (including some available and
uptodate tasks). Then make your "normal" targets depend on this
included initial target - would this fit your needs?


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message