ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Bodewig <>
Subject PropertyHelper (was Re: local properties (what about PropertyHelper?))
Date Thu, 14 Oct 2004 09:32:39 GMT
OK, separate answer since this really belongs on a separate thread.

On Fri, 08 Oct 2004, Wascally Wabbit <>

> o Should PropertyHelper replacements honor currently attached
>    hooks?

I'm really sorry to admit that I'm not familiar enough with the code
to comment on it.

The things Peter said sound as if we needed to revamp the current
implementation to make it useful anyway.  It simply moved below my

> o What's the ant-dev position on recursive property resolution?

Do you really think there is an official ant-dev position?  Luckily we
are on the same page most of the time, but there is room for different
opinions. 8-)

>    Is it coming or is that value-added that one must put in one's
>    own tasks?

I'm still not convinced it would be useful enough to be part of the
default implementation.  "Not convinced" != "I'd block any such attempt".

But AFAIU we need to change some things inside of Ant to enable
recursive property resolution, in particular the way we tokenize
strings when looking for properties.  This is something IÄd support.


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

View raw message