Re: [DISCUSS] EasyAnt: Ant based pre packaged build system for java projects
On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 1:19 AM, Ittay Dror <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The root of this is, I think, because while dealing with all this build > logic, both frameworks refused to embrace the principals behind OOP. Both > obviously need a backing language to actually do things and have chosen > Java, but the front end is not OO. Interesting thoughts Ittay. What you write meshes with JavaScript-based dream-Ant code posted a few weeks ago by one of the commiters (from SUN I believe), to which Stefan answered with LISP code I think ;-) All this to say that you are not alone these lines. But while I agree that having a true scripting language for Ant would help (OO, prototype-based, or functional, leaning towards the latter for Ant myself), I think it's important to remember than good builds are *declarative* in nature. Using a pure language, when most have little or no support to declare your intent, would make scripts unreadable. Lots of people argue, for good reasons too, that large Ant scripts are already unreadable, but my point is that being *declarative* is essential to builds in general and Ant in particular. And I'll just stop at that ;-) --DD - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [DISCUSS] EasyAnt: Ant based pre packaged build system for java projects
2008/4/30 Ittay Dror <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > I've read this thread and would like to maybe try and take this discussion > elsewhere. > > The way I see it is that Ant and Maven came to being in order to simplify > building projects. The philosophy (as I see it) was either "create an xml > file with a few lines calling some tasks" or "create an xml with a short > configuration". Along the way, it became apparent that building a project > involves a lot of logic and thus these two frameworks grew until now they > are both not simple to use. > > The root of this is, I think, because while dealing with all this build > logic, both frameworks refused to embrace the principals behind OOP. Both > obviously need a backing language to actually do things and have chosen > Java, but the front end is not OO. > > And now this discussion seem to try to invent new ways of accomplishing > logic by creating a 'before' attribute or macro redefinition etc. Why? > > Now, creating a full blown OO language in XML will also defy the 'easy' > purpose, mainly because XML was not designed to be a language (verbose > syntax, no debugger, etc.). > > But what about prototype oriented syntax? The benefit is that there's no > introduction of 'class' concept, modifying objects is easy. > > General idea is that the framework defines objects (mainly containers of > methods == tasks). Then the user creates his own object (data), and defines > the prototype of that object to be one of the frameworks, thus getting all > functionality. If he wants, he can override whatever methods he wants. > Having an object that encapsulates methods allows creating helper methods > which can easily be overridden , without complexity. > > So something like: > > /path/to/source/files > > > object.compile > > where 'jar_project' is defined by the framework (more like a toolkit) and > contains methods like 'compile', 'clean', etc. It can also have > 'create_eclipse_project' method based on the data passed to it. > > I hope I was clear enough. > > Ittay > > Oh, one more thing, with all this logic around, there really should be a > better way of debugging than 'echo'. Maybe the framework can convert the XML > code to some language for easy debugging? > > You should maybe have a look to buildr. -- Gilles Scokart - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [DISCUSS] EasyAnt: Ant based pre packaged build system for java projects
Dominique Devienne-2 wrote: > > But while I agree that having a true scripting language for Ant would > help (OO, prototype-based, or functional, leaning towards the latter > for Ant myself), I think it's important to remember than good builds > are *declarative* in nature. Using a pure language, when most have > little or no support to declare your intent, would make scripts > unreadable. > > I completely agree. I just saw that the example I gave was not posted well. Here's another try: So I have a project that I want to build a jar from:/path/to/sources project.compile This is all declerative. What it does is create a project object, with data member 'sourcePath' whose prototype is jar_project. Behind the scenese, the object has a lot of methods, but the average joe does not care about them. However, If someone wants to change the logic, he can then do that. Btw, I think this is a lot more declarative than defining lots of targets and tasks (these are defined by jar_project). Thank you, Ittay -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-DISCUSS--EasyAnt%3A-Ant-based-pre-packaged-build-system-for-java-projects-tp14735371p16986216.html Sent from the Ant - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [DISCUSS] EasyAnt: Ant based pre packaged build system for java projects
Gilles Scokart wrote: > > You should maybe have a look to buildr. > I did, and also raven, guilder, gant, gradle, graven and more. The thing is, Ant is the de-facto standard, with the largest community. If we want to finally have a system that is easy to understand and yet can build JEE projects, this is the place to start -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-DISCUSS--EasyAnt%3A-Ant-based-pre-packaged-build-system-for-java-projects-tp14735371p16987432.html Sent from the Ant - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: suggestion : Ant 1.8 full dist to include a 'scripting lang'
Stefano Marsili wrote: > > Hi everybody, > I'm really no Ant expert, but I'm working on a project > that might be of interest to this thread. > It defines an expression language that extends > Ant's property expansion. At the moment the language > is limited and is still subject to heavy changes > (I like to experiment and I'm still learning Java ;-). > > Did you look at ognl? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/suggestion-%3A-Ant-1.8-full-dist-to-include-a-%27scripting-lang%27-tp6258409p16988004.html Sent from the Ant - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Merge 641903 from trunk to 1.7 branch?
Hello Kevin, great work. I have switched my project to use the 1.7.1beta for all builds already and it is working great. Regards, Antoine Original-Nachricht > Datum: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 09:50:13 +0700 > Von: "Kevin Jackson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > An: "Ant Developers List" > Betreff: Re: Merge 641903 from trunk to 1.7 branch? > Hi, > > > The problem showed up as a symptom in Ivy but Ivy isn't the only one > > affected by it. I'm all in favor of merging the change regardless. > > The change to UnknownElement is now merged back into BRANCH_17 > > I will test on windows/ubuntu at some point this week - then I suppose > a further vote on the new srcs before releasing a further beta > > Thanks, > Kev > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] migrate Ivy's wiki to Confluence
+1 Antoine Original-Nachricht > Datum: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 07:43:47 +0200 > Von: "Xavier Hanin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > An: "Ant Developers List" > Betreff: Re: [VOTE] migrate Ivy\'s wiki to Confluence > Obviously, here's my own +1. > > It seems we have agreed to make this migration, but we still have to wait > for April 30th to respect usual vote timeframe. > > I'll be in vacation next week, with no internet access. So if this vote > ends > up like we can expect, it would be nice if somebody could ask infra to > create the confluence wiki. Otherwise I'll do this when I come back. > > Xavier > > On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 9:41 AM, Xavier Hanin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > There's been a discussion recently about Ivy's documentation, which end > up > > discussing user contributed documentation and especially the wiki. > > > > It seems 2 Ivy committers would prefer to use Confluence for Ivy wiki: > > http://markmail.org/message/n4mvsmowb3ujlyeg > > > > Moreover, some users expressed their opinion about this preference too: > > http://markmail.org/message/kjbzcqukzhqrowwt > > > > I already expressed the reasons why I'd like to migrate: > > "First, in JIRA we have activated the wiki syntax, which is the same as > > confluence one. So using confluence it would be only one wiki syntax to > > learn for both the wiki and issues. Secondly, I think with confluence > you > > have a rich text editor, which can be useful for people who don't want > to > > learn the syntax, or for tables which are cumbersome to write and > maintain > > in wiki syntax. Lastly, I much prefer the look of confluence pages over > * > > MoinMoin*." > > > > So I'd like to start a vote to see if migrating Ivy's wiki to confluence > is > > possible. > > > > Xavier > > -- > > Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant > > http://xhab.blogspot.com/ > > http://ant.apache.org/ivy/ > > http://www.xoocode.org/ > > > > > -- > Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant > http://xhab.blogspot.com/ > http://ant.apache.org/ivy/ > http://www.xoocode.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Defining format for Property
Hello, can you repost this message on our user mailling list user at ant dot apache dot org ? Regards, Antoine Original-Nachricht > Datum: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 09:31:55 -0700 (PDT) > Von: dkhanna123 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > An: dev@ant.apache.org > Betreff: Defining format for Property > > We have a task in ANT to update propertyfile with format like > > >pattern=.. > > > > And this can change the pattern in property file, now I do not want to > change/update property file but still I want that, if the value of key is > 1 > lets say proper.name=1 then my target should read it as "01" and NOT "1". > > Now can I do that without updating the propertyfile ? > > THanks > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Defining-format-for-Property-tp16897959p16897959.html > Sent from the Ant - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
