ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Antoine Levy Lambert <>
Subject Re: [POLL] target-groups
Date Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:44:21 GMT
Dominique Devienne wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:53 PM, Bruce Atherton <> wrote:
>> Can anyone give a concrete example where there would be a problem treating a
>> target-group as if it were a target?
> Can't. But my thinking is that we should ere on the conservative side
> when we introduce such a feature, and that it's easier to open it up
> later on to all targets with no BC issues, than closing it up because
> real world issues crop up, with BC issues. I really do believe that
> having target-group (or whatever the final name) purely abstract
> encourages better reusable build design by forcing to think in terms
> of the build's "public API" that provides clean "hooks" for reusable
> implementation-specific pieces to tack on. But as usual I seem to be
> in the minority and I certainly won't be casting any blocking votes on
> the matter. --DD
I also prefer to keep the target-group as they currently are to keep 
them simple. This is mostly a gut's feeling.
I am also interested to see soon a release of ant 1.8.0, so that the 
community can enjoy the hundreds of bug fixes and improvements which are 
contained in our current codebase.



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

View raw message