ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <>
Subject Re: Ant 2 et al.
Date Tue, 09 Jul 2002 08:03:54 GMT wrote:
> wrote on 07/09/2002 12:48:14 PM:
>>On Tue, 9 Jul 2002 wrote:
> [snip]
>>Not sure I understand what you want. Changing the <project> element name 
>>in build.xml to use a different name you feel is more apropriate ? 
>>Are you kidding ? 
> No, I'm saying we need to look at what things are used for and name them 
> appropriately. <project> has very little to do with project details, and 
> more to do with <build> details. 

Project means that it's the build project.
It's not a project descriptor.
The build-project, not the project-descriptor.

>>A number of people ( usually those who -1 the adding of scripting 
>>elements) believe ant should be more 'descriptive', and not 
>>procedural. That's why it's called <project> - it is intended to
>>describe the project, including how to build various components.
> But what it does *NOW* has nothing to do with a project. Are you saying 
> there should be one file to describe project information like the cvs 
> repository, sub projects etc and that same file should contain all the 
> build processes?

It's all about getting understood.
I would just call it <ant> and get along.
Besides, it's really easy to make <ant> and <project> both work, so we 
have new syntax and backward compatibility with really no effort.
How's that?

>>Most people only 'describe' how to build and test it, and do that
>>in a procedural way. That's where the need for <if>, <while>, etc comes

>>from, and that's why ant files become ugly and hard to understand. 
>>However many ant asks are pretty high level, and nothing prevent 
>>adding more 'descriptive' and higher level information ( using data 
>>types). Whatever is in the gump descriptor could very well be 
>>in an ant file.
>>Of course, the biggest focus is on describing how to build various
>>targets - that's what people need the most. I agree we should add
>>more 'descriptive'/higher level  data types under <project>, maybe
>>what gump uses.
> Now you've gotta be kidding. Keep all the project info and all the build 
> processes in one file?

Well, I strongly think that this ain't an Ant issue, but rather a Gump one.


Nicola Ken Barozzi         
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)

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

View raw message