OK, separate answer since this really belongs on a separate thread. On Fri, 08 Oct 2004, Wascally Wabbit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> o Should PropertyHelper replacements honor currently attached > hooks? I'm really sorry to admit that I'm not familiar enough with the code to comment on it. The things Peter said sound as if we needed to revamp the current implementation to make it useful anyway. It simply moved below my radar. > o What's the ant-dev position on recursive property resolution? Do you really think there is an official ant-dev position? Luckily we are on the same page most of the time, but there is room for different opinions. 8-) > Is it coming or is that value-added that one must put in one's > own tasks? I'm still not convinced it would be useful enough to be part of the default implementation. "Not convinced" != "I'd block any such attempt". But AFAIU we need to change some things inside of Ant to enable recursive property resolution, in particular the way we tokenize strings when looking for properties. This is something IÄd support. Stefan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
