I am not sure of how are used the "Resource" in the Ant code, but it
makes me think of the Eclipse adapters (probably a design pattern ?):
http://www.jeffreyricker.com/papers/Eclipse-Adapters.pdf
Though it changes the tests of the appendability, the touchability,
etc... of a Resource in the a
I haven't taken a look at the the code so this is off the cuff, but
couldn't you use a boolean field for each of the interfaces on the
Resource class to indicate whether it is supported? Then have any
methods that implement that interface check the boolean flag to see
whether to proxy the reque
I need help!
I'm trying to write a mapped-resource that is a decorator for a
different resource and changes the name of the decorated resource
using a mapper.
Resource itself is a class, so my base class is set. There are
several "optional" behaviors available via interfaces, namely
Touchable, A
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 7:55 AM, Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2008-11-13, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> This would be cleanly solved by the proto shown once a long time ago
>> by Conor (I believe), where dependencies could be specified *inside*
>> the target b
Hi IvyDE users,
The current url used for the IvyDE updatesite is:
http://ant.apache.org/ivy/ivyde/udapetsite
For operational reason, it is a little painful to maintain it there, so
we will now use a new main url:
http://www.apache.org/dist/ivyde/udapetsite
Compared to the old one, there won't
On 2008-11-13, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This would be cleanly solved by the proto shown once a long time ago
> by Conor (I believe), where dependencies could be specified *inside*
> the target body.
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12292
opened by Nicola
2008/11/13 Gilles Scokart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I'm +1 to put the concept in Ant's core, marked as experimental.
>
> A question that I have is how deep we want to push this concept?
>
> A first level would be that a phase or a target-group is a "normal"
> tartget for which the depends is build bas
> > There is one change: the current Ant behavior is to respect the
order in
> > which dependencies are set. The phase as currently proposed does not
deal
> > with this, making it only usable in certain use cases.
>
> Someone correct me if I'm wrong here, but AFAIK there's nothing in the
> docume
On 2008-11-13, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 2008-11-11, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>> Personally I would prefer supporting arbitrary attributes on
>>> targets.
>>> This would be less specific to EasyAnt and could ha
On 2008-11-14, Remie Bolte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Perhaps it is possible to create a dependency between phases, and
> additionally give targets the possibility to depend on a phase i.e.:
>
>
>
>
>
As EasyAnt's implementation stands, phases *are* targets, this means
(or should mean)
Perhaps it is possible to create a dependency between phases, and
additionally give targets the possibility to depend on a phase i.e.:
(please don't mind the names, i'm not following this topic close enough to
know them or make suggestions, it's just an example).
This way it is possible f
11 matches
Mail list logo
