The current file attribute of the import task is meant to act in the same way as href in html- - i.e relative to the directory that the importer file is in.
THe import task could easily use urls in the same way - but some internals in ant assume that build files are Files and only Files. Peter On 11/29/05, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 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] > >
