On Aug 18, 2010, at 11:15 AM, Jesse Glick wrote:
> On 08/18/2010 10:14 AM, kwut...@web.de wrote:
>> Why doesn't Ant just default to false and just omit warning me about this
>> for every Ant build?
>
> That would be an incompatible change. Some old build scripts may be
> intentionally compiling sources against ant.jar (typically because they
> define Ant tasks), tools.jar (who knows why), etc. They also ought to set
> includeantruntime=false but then explicitly add the desired <classpath>, e.g.
> <pathelement location="${ant.core.lib}"/>. (The warning will also go away if
> you set includeantruntime=true, but this will make your script be less
> portable.)
>
> I agree that it is irritating to issue this warning so often, but the
> alternative of breaking compatibility even for a minority of existing scripts
> seems worse. There are similar places in Ant where an old default was a bad
> choice but cannot now be changed compatibly.
>
> (You could also define ANT_OPTS=-Dbuild.sysclasspath=ignore for yourself but
> this will not help other people running your script.)
>
Personally, I would vote that we break backward-compatibility on this issue,
and require those running such ancient buildfiles to declare build.sysclasspath
if they DO want the system classpath appended.
-Matt
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
