On 2009-12-16, Bruce Atherton wrote:
> Sorry if the previous thread was hijacked by naming issues, but I'm
> not sure I'm ready to vote in a poll yet.
That's why it only is a poll and not a vote 8-)
To be honest I was hoping to get away from the naming issue and to a
discussion of the feature i
On 2009-12-16, Nicolas Lalevée wrote:
> In EasyAnt there is already this notion of phase. But I see no real
> conflict with not supporting target groups in Ant. EasyAnt could just
> implement phases as targets, it would be "just" an implementation detail.
AFAIU EasyAnt uses a ProjectHelper of th
You've convinced me. Just because we can't think of a problem doesn't
mean that one doesn't exist, and it is a little late in the day to start
monkeying around if we want to get a new release out the door.
So Stefan, as far as your poll is concerned, count me a +1 for the
current code base.
Dominique Devienne wrote:
This allows to release sooner (1.7.1 is 18 months old), without rushing what is
admittedly a more radical change to Ant's target dependency handling.
Agreed. More broadly, I would like to deflate discussions of this kind a bit. How many users are really clamoring for
Hi
a +1 from me
Martijn
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
Hi,
Nicolas wants to donate his ProjectHelper implementation that allows
build files to be written in Groovy. It can be found attached to
https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48347
It would start life at Ant inside the sandbox.
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Antoine Levy Lambert wrote:
> is a sequence of tasks. If the process is highly configurable, there can be
> several blocks of tasks which are optionally executed.
Maybe a custom executor that blocks some targets would work for you?
Depends how these properties tha
2009/12/16 Nicolas Lalevée :
> [...] But targets are all "public"
Except for the tradition of having non-public targets' names start with a dash.
> So it seemed to me quite useless to try to restrict anything.
Restrict? More like caution, that's all. Lets not open Pandora's box
just yet on targe
On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 08:51:27 -0600, Dominique Devienne
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:53 PM, Bruce Atherton
> wrote:
>> Can anyone give a concrete example where there would be a problem
>> treating a
>> target-group as if it were a target?
>
> Can't. But my thinking is that we should ere on
Dominique Devienne wrote:
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:53 PM, Bruce Atherton wrote:
Can anyone give a concrete example where there would be a problem treating a
target-group as if it were a target?
Can't. But my thinking is that we should ere on the conservative side
when we introduce su
Bruce Atherton wrote:
I think that would be very confusing at this point.
If most people in the ant community, especially committers, think that
this idea breaks the philosophy of ant, then it should not be developed.
Maybe this kind of needs will be better addressed using the new groovy
front
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 7:53 PM, Bruce Atherton wrote:
> Can anyone give a concrete example where there would be a problem treating a
> target-group as if it were a target?
Can't. But my thinking is that we should ere on the conservative side
when we introduce such a feature, and that it's easier
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:53:25 -0800, Bruce Atherton
wrote:
> Sorry if the previous thread was hijacked by naming issues, but I'm not
> sure I'm ready to vote in a poll yet.
>
> To me, only two of the options are seriously being discussed right now:
>
> 1) the current target-group codebase
>
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 13:19:55 +0100, Stefan Bodewig
wrote:
> before we get carried away with naming discussions ...
>
> Currently I don't feel there is consensus of what we'd like to see with
> target-group (if anything at all). The options I see are
>
> * have some sort of composite of target
On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 13:03:45 +0100, Jean-Louis Boudart
wrote:
> How about:
>
>
>
>
> /me run and hides!
>
> 2009/12/12 Nicolas Lalevée
>
>> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 11:51:30 -0600, Dominique Devienne
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 6:32 AM, Xavier Hanin
>> > wrote:
>> >> 2009/12/10 Ste
14 matches
Mail list logo
