DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28444>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28444 Import: Target Handling Bug ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-04-19 14:48 ------- I'm not sure given the last post my point came across. I'm not against using using a prefix to resolve conflicts between imported targets and/or with the local importER's targets. I'm against using the importEE's project name as the prefix. I can't import two build files (without modifying them) with the 'common' project name for examples. And it opens the door to weird edge cases in import. What I propose is that the import prefix be made optional (no need for it if there are no conflicts), and when necessary to disambiguate conflicts, the importER decide what prefixes to use in its OWN build script, and that additionally the prefixes used are completely private to the importER, i.e. an implementation detail to the importER. Anyways, this battle was already lost, and the current behavior is here to stay. Not that it's that bad really, just poor design in my book. But hey, I'm surely wrong since I've been overriden by everyone. --DD --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
