--- Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, Dominique Devienne > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Why go for 'ant.library.dir' instead of > 'ant.library.dirs'? > This is only peripherally related... this has been discussed briefly before, but I never received a satisfactory answer. Can someone justify the restriction that all Java classes and resources to be used by Ant must be in jars? I mean, beyond the obvious "jars are better." If a user wanted to use classes stored in a package structure (and have them accessible by default instead of overriding with <classpath> elements wherever accepted), why should we stop him or her?
-Matt __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
