On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 8:00 AM, Xavier Hanin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Gilles Scokart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > +1 for me as well (let's put a little bit more presure from the Ivy guys > ;-). > > > > To come back to the impact on Ivy, I think we should put a note in our > > doc saying that using the settings task with an id requires 1.7.1. > > We can put a reference to the bug, the problem occurs only when you call ant > with multiple targets, each depending on the same settings, so I think > people can use Ivy settings with with ant 1.7.0 without running into the > problem.
For the record, I think it's bad Ant style to use ids in tasks. This is kept around for BC, but should be discouraged. Using ids on types OTOH is OK, and essential to types in fact. If a task should refer to part of another task's internal config, this hints to the config needing to be its own type referred to by both tasks. It's even OK for the type to be implicitly created by the first task, when it receives for example a configid="foo" attribute, so that the second task can use it using configrefid="foo" or a nested <config refid="foo" />. I'm not sure how Ivy does it exactly, but somehow I got the feel from the discussions that it's using the "deprecated" id'd task pattern, which is a "bad" pattern IMHO. Hopefully I got the wrong feeling ;-) --DD --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
