On 11/29/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It would fit better into Ant´s future if the existing <import> would > support <resources> - e.g. <urlresource>s.
We've had this debate before... I'd be all for allowing to <import> resources instead of files, except for the way <import> was designed to not do things relative to its parent directory, like HTML and XSL hrefs. I can't see how we could have a clean "relative" import model like HTML/XSL while retaining BC. Yes, we could probably import easily a resource of the "first level", but it would be kludgy at best for this imported build to refer to other resources in the same jar file for example. So really we have to choose between limiting ourself to our current design for import, or extend it to resources but in such a way that I feel is unnatural, inconsistent, and a bit of a hack. But maybe I'm just missing the point somewhere, or my view that import is flawed is what flawed in fact ;-) --DD --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
