ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Bodewig <bode...@apache.org>
Subject Re: antlib
Date Thu, 24 Apr 2003 15:07:18 GMT
On Thu, 24 Apr 2003, Dominique Devienne <DDevienne@lgc.com> wrote:

> I'm not fond of this pre-req thing you're describing,

I didn't make myself clear, that's obvious.

In good old Ant terms:

<available classname="org.apache.log4j.Category" property="Log4j.present"/>
<fail>The antlib requires log4j version XYZ to run</fail>

Maps to the idea of reusing Ant's existing vocabulary.

I want to enable the antlib to state what it needs, I didn't think of
a way to satisfy the pre-reqs (at least not yet).

> I think classloading issues would be greatly simplified if Ant
> loaded only its core in the system CL, and everything else in child
> AntLoaders.

It would simplify a lot but break backwards compatibility - the impact
depends on how broad you define what belongs to the core 8-)

Is the Java task part of the core?  There are several optional tasks
that create Java task internally in Ant itself, much more to be
expected outside of Ant.

Sequential?  ExecTask? Mkdir?  Soon you'll end up having almost
everything back on the system classloader (or at least on a
classloader common to all tasks).

We should enable such a mechanism, but we need to keep the door open
for the old mechanism.  We may even be forced to make the old
classloading scheme the default for everything that could be loaded
from the system classloader in Ant 1.5.3.

Stefan

Mime
View raw message