ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From peter reilly <>
Subject Re: [Patch] keep-going feature
Date Wed, 09 Jul 2003 14:54:56 GMT
On Wed, 2003-07-09 at 07:54, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Alexey Solofnenko <> wrote:
> > Actually the reason to implement keep-alive (originally keep-going)
> > is to find as many problems as possible. It is done by executing all
> > targets that do not depend directly or indirectly on failed
> > targets. It is not fail-on-error flag - the build will still fail.
> OK, I agree that we are talking about different things, then.
> keep-going seems a better name, not sure whether it is the best
> possible name (I've always been extremely bad with names and Ant has
> suffered from this several times 8-).
> I'm fine with the revised implementation as well. I'd print the
> exception's stack trace with a debug or even verbose loglevel in the
> catch block for those exceptions that will not be rethrown, though.

> Maybe <ant>, <subant> and <antcall> (<*ant*>?) should get a new
> attribute as well?

The keep-going attribute gets passed to the subprojects in
Project#initSubProject() (which is called by <ant/> et al). 

However, It does not work as expected when using <foreach/> as the
first antcall failure will cause the foreach iteration to stop.


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

View raw message