ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <>
Subject Re: [ant2] Optional and Core designations
Date Fri, 22 Jun 2001 02:17:10 GMT
On Fri, 22 Jun 2001 05:38, Jim Jackl-Mochel wrote:
> I just finished reading through the summary of the ant2 features
> and it looks good. Now come the questions. :-)
> [1] Are we planning on having the ant2 optional and core tasks
> continue to be part of seperate packages ?
> I would love to
> see another mechanism used to distribute these. Having done
> many rebuilds of ANT in which I have had to remove/add
> core/optional tasks I would love to have a cleaner mechanism
> to define what is included in a current configuration of ANT.
> The idea of changing a package name when an optional task becomes
> partt of the core seems awkward.
> This may already be handled/covered in the revised task definition
> mechanism.
> Is it ?

They way the current thinking works is basically there will not be 
"core" tasks or "optional" tasks. There will be a number of task libraries, 
some of which ship with ant. Each task library will contain types (ie tasks, 
datatypes, mappers, listeners, aspect handlers etc). The types will be 
grouped according to some mechanism (undecided atm). I would like the 
categorization be according to function (ie jdk task library, file task 
library, text manip task library etc) others want to have a central core task 



| "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, |
| and proving that there is no need to do so - almost |
| everyone gets busy on the proof."                   |
|              - John Kenneth Galbraith               |

View raw message