ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <>
Subject Re: [PATCH] ant task with (nested) fileset(s)
Date Mon, 12 Nov 2001 12:41:59 GMT
On Mon, 12 Nov 2001 23:27, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> From: "Peter Donald" <>
> > > Where is the templating capability? We cannot keep on vetoing proposals
> > > because templating is considered to be the right solution, and then do
> > > nothing about providing the templates.
> >
> > who said we have done nothing. I know I have provided at least 5
> > different possible implementations, each testing different features. Some
> > good, some bad.
> Maybe is because it was over a year ago, or something. Can you please point
> me to those implementations of *templates* (or on the archives)? I have
> noticed many of your proposals in other matters of ANT2 but I do not
> remember much about *specifics* with respect to templates.


> As I said, where are they. If this is a sleeping thread for a year lets
> revive it and really see what you are proposing with real test cases to
> talk about.
> I would like to see:
> (1) How to write <foreach> functionality over a fileset (or equivalent).
> (2) How to write <javaon> functionality.

loaded questions. Assumes we need this functionality. While XSLT could 
provide this I don't think they are needed given (3)

> (3) How to write new pseudo-tasks that are defined as the sequential
>      execution of existing tasks with ways to pass arguments.

See message with Subject "Re: Question about properties and ant2" on 14th 

> (4) How the whole thing can be invoked toguether. Is it more that
>         ant -f buildfile target

In proposal it is done by file extension. IIRC it is

ant -f buildfile.ati target

> > > In the mean time more and more people go on using things like the
> > > <foreach> task, which they have to fetch from somewere else.
> >
> > and ...
> It means we will not be able to just tell people to abandon it and go
> change everything nor just tell them "sorry you should have waited until we
> made our minds". The longer the wait the larger the headache will be.

Right. But is "talk-talk" going to get us any closer to a solution to this 
problem? Of course not. Only way to get closer to solution is "walk-walk", 
people actually start working together and implementing things. I have no 
problem doing the work - hell in worst case I would do it all if I had too - 
problem is "design by committee" on a tool that is "good enough" at the 
moment. No one agree or even trys to work together - can you guess the end 
result ? I can. Egos are great things - no?



| "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want |
| to test a man's character, give him power."          |
|       -Abraham Lincoln                               |

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

View raw message