> I agree with the goal to make as many things antlibs as possible, I
> could even be convinced that we start to break up our current set of
> core/optional tasks into antlibs with independent release cycles.
Then weŽll earn the whole inter-project-dependency-problems. We have to
ensure that an AntLib works with all AntCore releases or fails with a
defined error.
I agree that breaking Ant into several modules would improve the
development process, especially for the optional tasks. An AntLib for
the task implementation AND the correct version of the 3rd party lib.
But I see two things:
1. Plugging in AntLibs should be very easy - especially if they were
part of earlier Ant releases. Or we have to use namespaces everywhere...
<project xmlns:zip="org/apache/tools/ant/antlib-zip.xml"
xmlns:script="org/apache/tools/ant/antlib-script.xml"
...>
is a little bit too long, I think.
So dropping the AntLibs into a directory and they will be "auto-deployed"
into Ant (I like that feature of JBoss :-) will be fine.
2. It should be easy for the user to get a "complete" working version of
Ant. So we should provide a bundle of the AntCore and a set of AntLibs.
Jan
