Hi, On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Jesse Glick <jesse.gl...@oracle.com> wrote: > Should the Ant source tree (src/main/ and perhaps also src/tests/) be split > into subtrees? > > [ ] No, leave it the way it is - one big tree, using <selector> to > conditionally compile pieces and route classes to various JARs. > > [ ] Yes, split it into subtrees, where each tree maps to an output JAR, may > have its own classpath, and is compiled completely or not at all.
I'm 50/50 on this - on the one hand having it in separate trees is both more sensible and *should* make releases easier (reduces reliance on selectors etc). On the other hand the fact that the ant build file is complex allows it to be used as a source of examples of how to deal with a gnarly build. > > > And while we're at it: > > Should ant.jar and ant-nodeps.jar be consolidated? > > [ ] No, leave these as two JAR outputs (and two subtrees if the first > proposal is accepted). > > [ x ] Yes, merge them into one ant.jar (and one subtree " " " " " "), to > include all tasks and types with no linkage-level deps on 3rd-party > libraries (even if there is an implicit dep on a 3rd-party tool such as > Perforce), and remove the "Core" vs. "Optional" distinction in the manual. Absolutely +1 on remove the core vs optional distinction in the manual Kev --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
