ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Donald <>
Subject Re: [RESULT] core extensions
Date Mon, 23 Apr 2001 09:26:38 GMT
At 10:53  23/4/01 +0200, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>> * provide a way to define the order in which targets a given target
>>   depends upon get executed.
>>   [veto by Peter Donald]
>I'd like to challenge that veto, Pete.

consider it lifted then ;) It was more a theoretical rather than practical
desire - motivated by JDDs idea of distributed builds which was -1'ed

>What's your proposal to solve the use case of beanutils' all target?
>The use case is simple, make sure we do a "clean" build.
>As current Ant will execute targets that don't depend on each other in
>left-to-right order, there may be quite a few build system that rely
>on this.  We need some way to keep this feature, or some equivalent

Agreed - we will have this semantic in ant-call anyway (it is needed
badly). I would prefer if we only had one way to do it but it is not
critical enough to make an issue of it - I am sure a slight duplicity won't
lead to perl ;)



| "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, |
| and proving that there is no need to do so - almost |
| everyone gets busy on the proof."                   |
|              - John Kenneth Galbraith               |

View raw message