ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Wolfgang Häfelinger <>
Subject RE: ComponentHelper replacement
Date Fri, 26 May 2006 08:49:05 GMT
>> My preference is to improve Ant's API. 

I  would  like  to  see  Ant  evolving in such a way allowing 
me to implement a framework like Maven on top of it. 

>> So, the question is "can Ant evolve into a good Java API?"

I have no doubt that it can be done, we just need to focus on

However, why does it need to be a Java API? Let's just talk
about a good API and treat Java as an implementation detail.

I think it would be pretty cool to implement tasks (i.e. macros
with a "native" implementation)  in  other languages as well (I
would love to see Python supported).


"Stephen McConnell (DPML)" <> 
23-05-2006 21:10
Please respond to
"Ant Developers List" <>

"'Ant Developers List'" <>

RE: ComponentHelper replacement


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dominique Devienne [] 
> Sent: Wednesday, 24 May 2006 4:16 AM
> To: Ant Developers List
> Subject: Re: ComponentHelper replacement
> > However, it is possible to isolate Ant idiosyncrasies as an 
> > implementation concern providing one can establish a viable project 
> > model.
> I've long thought Ant needed a more rigorous model exposed to 
> Java clients and extension builders. However, I don't think 
> what I had in mind was quite as ambitious as what you 
> describe. It's not easy to evolve Ant in such a way, and 
> attempts at starting from scratch failed
> (Ant: myrmidon and mutant), not from lack of quality, but 
> from lack of community support.
> Maven (1 or 2) may indeed be closer to your thinking.

Close? Maybe.
The solution? No.

IMO Maven is too focussed on build time concerns (as opposed to the 
runtime management subject). In effect Maven's underlying framework does 
fold easily into deployment and runtime solutions (which is at the end of
the day the product of a build).  In addition there are simple pragmatic
issues that Maven does not fulfil.  My point is that Ant as an API needs 
evolve and its evolution should be driven by API users.  It's not a 
of Maven - Maven does not deliver what I need - I can build systems on Ant
that deliver better solutions than Maven but in doing so, there are issues
in the Ant API.

My preference is to improve Ant's API. 

> > I.e. perhaps Dominique's suggestion on the money?
> You meant Wolfgang, no? ;-) --DD

LOL - Yes.

However - it raises an interesting question:

>Dominique wrote:
> Ant's purpose is as a build tools, not a Java library.

So, the question is "can Ant evolve into a good Java API?"

  If the answer is YES - in your opinion .. how?
  If the answer is NO - in your opinion .. why not?

Cheers, Steve.

Stephen McConnell

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

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

View raw message