>> -split out libraries for execution, java exec, other misc things
>> -complete programmatic use of ant without problems
>
>I'm thinking along the lines of moving the ant codebase
>structure to something that reflects a project codebase per
>jar file where each project (a.k.a. ant-sub-project)
> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Loughran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Apologies for the delay in responding (have been
swamped with moving house and the cup).
> > I think that part of the problem here is that Ant is
> > bootstrapping itself from nothing and as a
> > consequence w
On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Wolfgang Häfelinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Which one would you prefer? Or should we invent a new one?
>
> Use an existing one of course. There could also be more than one,
> just supported by a "language" attribute.
This is the approach the NAnt folks have chosen, you
On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>> On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, Alexey Solofnenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> About property expansion - many languages use the same syntax for
>>> inline property substitution. It may be good not to expand
>>> pro
Here is a simple example showing how flexible, easy, and legible this
is:
This provid
Riedel Thomas (KSFD 121) wrote:
Yes I agree the kind of our Ant-usage might be a bit beyond horizon. We
are doing continious integration for a 5 Mio LOC project, generic
automated junit testing, automatic deploying into a production like
server pool, online testing, web-testing, automated metrics
> -What is the existing one you'd recommend? XPath 1.0? Perl?
> Pascal-style, Ruby-Style?
I implemented the "test" expression logic found in popular shells, left a
couple of
tests out (like -p, -O etc) and added a couple of usefull tests like
-P s => test whether "s" is a reference
-R s => t
Wolfgang Häfelinger wrote:
Which one would you prefer? Or should we invent a new one?
Use an existing one of course. There could also be more than one,
just supported by a "language" attribute.
We do have the "clumsy" XML expression language that we built into the
condition task and it follo
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, Alexey Solofnenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
About property expansion - many languages use the same syntax for
inline property substitution. It may be good not to expand
properties automatically.
That's the reason it hasn't been implemented, exactly.
Apache Wiki wrote:
Dear Wiki user,
You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Ant Wiki" for change
notification.
The following page has been changed by heatherfox:
http://wiki.apache.org/ant/ExternalResources
---
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Has the possibility of adding multiple conditions to the target 'if' and
'unless' attributes ever been considered? Are there any reasons why this
change would be a bad idea?
I have found Groovy (and to a lesser degree other scripting
languages) to be very useful
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Has the possibility of adding multiple conditions to the target 'if' and
'unless' attributes ever been considered? Are there any reasons why this
change would be a bad idea?
I have found Groovy (and to a lesser degree other scripting
languages) to be very useful
> Which one would you prefer? Or should we invent a new one?
Use an existing one of course. There could also be more than one,
just supported by a "language" attribute.
> We do have the "clumsy" XML expression language that we built into the
> condition task and it follows the rest of Ant's "lan
To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project svn-antlib-test has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue affe
14 matches
Mail list logo
