On Thu, 2003-07-24 at 13:49, Conor MacNeill wrote: > On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 10:26 pm, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > > > > What about: > > > > <import file="blah.xml" name="blah"/> > > Sure - pretty much what I thought, maybe a more descriptive attribute name > (overrideprefix). It would default to the imported project name. > > > > > So IIUC it's really only about making the import task resolve files > > relative to the basedir of the project that imports, as you say above. > > > > Yes. This is how Ant works for other tasks so it should work that way for > import too. The resolution does have to be done in Import itself using a > String argument since the default File argument would be resolved by Ant to > the outermost project's basedir which would be wrong.
Just to be sure I understand ... Assuming the following: A.xml imports B.xml which imports C.xml. B has an import <import file="C.xml"/> Are saying that A.xml is the outermost project and B.xml is the current project ? If so this is not the way import works, there is only one project. (As against <ant> and <antcall> et al, where there is a new sub-project). In the current code, if B.xml has a basedir attribute for the project element, the attribute is ignored (Not good). So the question is what should B's import be relative to: 1) A.xml's basedir 2) B.xml 3) B.xml's currently ignored basedir attribute. I think that the consensus is 3). Peter --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]