ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Rees <>
Subject Re: cvs commit: jakarta-ant build.xml
Date Wed, 14 Feb 2001 21:10:29 GMT
Sounds good. I also just looked at the committed text and it is a
little different/better than what I submitted and I think it makes
more sense to be in the binary.


On Thu, 15 Feb 2001 00:40:12 +1100, Conor MacNeill wrote:

>I think it should be there, so people can know where to look for
>dependencies. Since all it basically does not is redirect the user to the
>manual I think it can stand. The manual is clear that the jar can be there
>or in the classpath, which should be clear.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "David Rees" <>
>To: <>
>Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2001 10:39 AM
>Subject: Re: cvs commit: jakarta-ant build.xml
>Should the README still be passed on to the binary distribution? The
>new README doesn't have much in it - I submitted (committed) patches
>that moved most of its content to the manuals.
>Also, as it is written it implied required libraries need to be there
>when they could be in the CLASSPATH as well. Maybe we just need to
>update what it says to reflect this?
>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message