ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bruce Atherton <>
Subject Re: [POLL] Bug 48804
Date Fri, 23 Apr 2010 19:51:02 GMT
I think that since the code doesn't address the primary usecase, that 
trumps pretty-well all considerations.  It is hard to imagine how 
someone would be relying on the order of the extension point/extension 
evaluation in order to avoid the extension point. Since the behaviour 
isn't documented anyway, doing so would have to be considered a hack.

I'd say make it do what it is supposed to do. If it passes gump, then we 
can wait to see if any bug reports show up. If they do, we can deal with 
those on a case-by-case basis, perhaps arriving at a wholly different 
solution for them. Personally, I don't think any will show up.

On 23/04/2010 2:29 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> Hi all,
> currently extension-point and import don't play together like they are
> supposed to.  You can't extend an imported extension point with a target
> from the importing build file (which is the primary use-case, really).
> Attached to this bug is a patch that fixes the problem (including an
> AntUnit test that fails in 1.8.0).
> The same patch breaks a different AntUnit test, namely
> testExtensionPointMustBeKnown in extension-point-test.xml.  This test
> asserts that you can't extend an extension point from the same build
> file before that extension point has been defined.  I.e. you can't do
>    <target name="bar" extensionOf="foo"/>
>    <extension-point name="foo"/>
> Personally I think the changed behavior isn't a bad thing, the old
> behavior isn't documented and we shouldn't even try to keep it.
> What do you think?
> Stefan
> PS: I'd love to see this fixed with Ant 1.8.1.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message