Finally some body with sense :-)
> From: Wannheden, Knut [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> The question I think is more important is whether antlibs
> should be loaded
> explicitly with something like an <antlib/> task (similar to
> <taskdef/>) or
> if it should be more automagical like in Jelly where the
> namespace name is
> parsed (e.g. xmlns:j="jelly:core" or
> xmlns:my="jelly:org.foo.MyTagLibrary").
> (Jelly actually allows both.) I am clearly in favor of
> requiring explicit
> loading with a designated task.
>
The proposal <antlib> provides a task <antlib> which can be used to
load libraries manually. Al the same time there are hooks on the code
for an autoloading mechanism to be supported. In escence, it would
allow ANT's main() to do something like:
- get all antlib.xml from the classpath ( using getResources);
- process each one of the antlib.xml resources found so that
all definitions get registered.
All the processing is provided by a static method of the Antlib task.
In principle this was designed just for loading the core at load time,
we could expand it to allow loading all jars (antlibs) in the classpath, which
means all antlibs in the ANT/lib directory.
The main issue is how to enforce ordering to deal with dependencies
between the antlibs.
Jose Alberto
