From ant-dev-return-19561-qmlist-jakarta-archive-ant-dev=jakarta.apache.org@jakarta.apache.org Mon Nov 12 11:58:44 2001 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-ant-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 17019 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 11:58:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 12 Nov 2001 11:58:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 27335 invoked by uid 97); 12 Nov 2001 11:58:39 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 27304 invoked by uid 97); 12 Nov 2001 11:58:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Ant Developers List" Reply-To: "Ant Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 27293 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2001 11:58:37 -0000 Message-Id: <200111121158.fACBwbu26752@mail012.syd.optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" From: Peter Donald To: "Ant Developers List" Subject: Re: [PATCH] ant task with (nested) fileset(s) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 22:55:41 +1100 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.1] References: <200111121050.fACAoBJ03747@mail008.syd.optusnet.com.au> <002d01c16b6d$070e27a0$0100a8c0@jose> In-Reply-To: <002d01c16b6d$070e27a0$0100a8c0@jose> X-Wisdom-Cookie: . MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N On Mon, 12 Nov 2001 22:25, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote: > From: "Peter Donald" > > > As I think I have said before. Neither need should be filled using this > > style task. The first need should be filled by writing a task and the > > second need should be filled by templating. Currently Ant1 tasks are a > > PITA to write so first style functionality is acceptable. I don't see > > this as always being true though. Either way it is functionality that > > does not bring value in long term. > > 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. > I have not seen yet a real proposal on the matter much less an > implementation that we can use to assess if indeed templates is the right > tool or not. closing your eyes and then whining that you can't see is not a productive activity. > I would like to see how these templates get described, how can I specify > thingd like *iterating over files* using them. How easy or difficult they > are to write, and more important how understandable is what the user > actually writes and needs to maintain. and you have ... how many times in the past? > I still do not understand how we can keep on rejecting things on the > argument that it should be done using a feature that do not exists, it is > hardly in the main road-map, and there is not even a hint of delivery date > or spec. How can any one help on contributing it, if this things are not > there. I agree with you that it would be nice to have a road map or at least a vague direction. > In the mean time more and more people go on using things like the > task, which they have to fetch from somewere else. and ... -- Cheers, Pete ------------------------------------------------------ Mark Twain: "In the real world, the right thing never happens in the right place at the right time. It is the task of journalists and historians to rectify this error." ------------------------------------------------------ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: