Re: ant 1.7. Finding undefined variables

Dominique Devienne wrote: On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Dave Pawson wrote: 2009/5/20 Dominique Devienne : Yes, that's what I generate. Except I run through the properties file and the build file to ensure I get all the (used) properties! As apposed to what I remembered to put in (and didn't

Re: ant 1.7. Finding undefined variables

2009/5/21 Dominique Devienne : >> An example please Dominique? > > XML elements reading properties without the ${name} notation > > > > ... > > XML elements writing properties affecting the rest of the build: > > > I've not seen any of those. Perhaps you could provide me with an example bui

Re: ant 1.7. Finding undefined variables

On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 11:25 PM, Dave Pawson wrote: > 2009/5/20 Dominique Devienne : > >> I suggested postprocessing Ant's output as there are can hidden use of >> properties which is not easy to pick up by parsing the Ant XML file >> (they don't look like ${name} in attributes for example), and

Re: ant 1.7. Finding undefined variables

2009/5/20 Dominique Devienne : > I suggested postprocessing Ant's output as there are can hidden use of > properties which is not easy to pick up by parsing the Ant XML file > (they don't look like ${name} in attributes for example), and could > thus possibly pick up info on more properties. An

Re: ant 1.7. Finding undefined variables

On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Dave Pawson wrote: > 2009/5/20 Dominique Devienne : > >> Maybe running in verbose or debug mode and grepping for all property >> related messages, especially those about not finding the property, and >> convert that into a build similarly to what you did? --DD > >

Re: ant 1.7. Finding undefined variables

2009/5/20 Dominique Devienne : > Maybe running in verbose or debug mode and grepping for all property > related messages, especially those about not finding the property, and > convert that into a build similarly to what you did? --DD Yes Possibly. I chose Python and xslt. I gather you don't fin

Re: ant 1.7. Finding undefined variables

On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Dave Pawson wrote: > 2009/5/20 Dominique Devienne : > Yes, that's what I generate. Except I run through the properties file > and the build file to ensure I get all the (used) properties! >  As apposed to what I remembered to put in (and didn't change). > That's th

Re: ant 1.7. Finding undefined variables

2009/5/20 Dominique Devienne : > On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Dave Pawson wrote: >> I keep changing them which results in undefined variables which ant >> ignores, spreading odd filenames all over the place. > > What I used to do was use with a nested condition asserting for > some properties

Re: ant 1.7. Finding undefined variables

On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Dave Pawson wrote: > I keep changing them which results in undefined variables which ant > ignores, spreading odd filenames all over the place. What I used to do was use with a nested condition asserting for some properties to be defined were indeed defined. Abor

ant 1.7. Finding undefined variables

I've been writing a couple of ant build files in which I've defined quite a few variables in an included properties file. A couple of variables within the build.xml too. I keep changing them which results in undefined variables which ant ignores, spreading odd filenames all over the place. I've s

Stefan Bodewig, please kindly help -- ant 1.7: ant 1.5.1 patch

&& (!isFamily("mac") || osName.endsWith("x")); > } else if (family.equals("win9x")) { > isFamily = isFamily("windows") && > !(osName.indexOf("nt") >

ant 1.7: ant 1.5.1 patch

|| osName.indexOf("os/390") > -1; } else { throw new BuildException( "Don\'t know how to detect os family \"" + family + "\""); } } if (name != n

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41596] - ant 1.7 bzip2 task creates corrupted output file for some inputs

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41596] - ant 1.7 bzip2 task creates corrupted output file for some inputs

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41596] - ant 1.7 bzip2 task creates corrupted output file for some inputs

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41596] - ant 1.7 bzip2 task creates corrupted output file for some inputs

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41596] - ant 1.7 bzip2 task creates corrupted output file for some inputs

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41596] - ant 1.7 bzip2 task creates corrupted output file for some inputs

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41596] - ant 1.7 bzip2 task creates corrupted output file for some inputs

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41596] - ant 1.7 bzip2 task creates corrupted output file for some inputs

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41596] - ant 1.7 bzip2 task creates corrupted output file for some inputs

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41596] - ant 1.7 bzip2 task creates corrupted output file for some inputs

gzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41596 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|ant 1.7 tar and bzip2 tasks |ant 1.7 bzip2 task creates |corrupted output fil

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41596] - ant 1.7 tar and bzip2 tasks corrupted output file when size exceeds certain limit

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41596] - ant 1.7 tar and bzip2 tasks corrupted output file when size exceeds certain limit

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41596] - ant 1.7 tar and bzip2 tasks corrupted output file when size exceeds certain limit

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41596] - ant 1.7 tar and bzip2 tasks corrupted output file when size exceeds certain limit

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41596] - ant 1.7 tar and bzip2 tasks corrupted output file when size exceeds certain limit

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 41596] New: - ant 1.7 tar and bzip2 tasks corrupted output file when size exceeds certain limit

gzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41596 Summary: ant 1.7 tar and bzip2 tasks corrupted output file when size exceeds certain limit Product: Ant Version: 1.7.0 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity:

Re: [Fwd: Re: please update the next release of Ant 1.7 to Xerces 2.9.0]

On Mon, 04 Dec 2006, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As raised on the user mail list. Should we upgrade? I share Jan's concern (class file format might be too recent), other than that +1. > And, assuming we have been using the live source tree in gump, it is > what we've been buildin

AW: [Fwd: Re: please update the next release of Ant 1.7 to Xerces 2.9.0]

is what we've been building against. > > > Original Message ---- >Subject: Re: please update the next release of Ant 1.7 to Xerces 2.9.0 >Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2006 11:06:20 + >From: Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Ant Users List >To: Ant Users List

[Fwd: Re: please update the next release of Ant 1.7 to Xerces 2.9.0]

ssage Subject: Re: please update the next release of Ant 1.7 to Xerces 2.9.0 Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2006 11:06:20 + From: Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: Ant Users List To: Ant Users List References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: VOTE: add an antlib (and optional task) loader to ant 1.7

Peter Reilly wrote: Vote: yes this is a good thing for 1.7 [ ] no, let us stabilize 1.7[ X] Please let us get 1.7 first, Martijn - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [

Re: VOTE: add an antlib (and optional task) loader to ant 1.7

Peter Reilly wrote: yes this is a good thing for 1.7 [ ] no, let us stabilize 1.7[X] Looks promising - but take our time and put it in when it is ready. I agree with Steve McConnell that class loader mutation is not something we should encourage. If we have to do it for ant-*.jar o

RE: VOTE: add an antlib (and optional task) loader to ant 1.7

> -Original Message- > From: Peter Reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Vote: > yes this is a good thing for 1.7 [ ] > no, let us stabilize 1.7[ ] I'm a *non-binding* -1 on doing this relative to 1.7. This position is on the basis that I think that there is an fundam

Re: VOTE: add an antlib (and optional task) loader to ant 1.7

On 9/4/06, Peter Reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: yes this is a good thing for 1.7 [ ] no, let us stabilize 1.7[ ] +0, since didn't fully follow the ClassLoader discussion, so can't really yeah or nay this. Note though that I liked Jesse's idea of not loading tasks by default,

Re: VOTE: add an antlib (and optional task) loader to ant 1.7

On Mon, 04 Sep 2006, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Vote: > > yes this is a good thing for 1.7 [ ] > > no, let us stabilize 1.7[ X] > > > > I think right now I'm going to in the no category, though +0 rather > than -1. This is not because I dont think its

Re: VOTE: add an antlib (and optional task) loader to ant 1.7

On Mon, 2006-09-04 at 20:25 +0100, Steve Loughran wrote: > Peter Reilly wrote: > > Sorry for asking for another vote on the Classloader for ant issue, No problem. > I think right now I'm going to in the no category, though +0 rather than > -1. This is not because I dont think its a good idea -I

Re: VOTE: add an antlib (and optional task) loader to ant 1.7

Peter Reilly wrote: Sorry for asking for another vote on the Classloader for ant issue, but I think that the last vote was very half-hearted in slight support of including the (new) classloader task. However, I think that there was not enough support. In the meantime, I have been looking at Jesse

VOTE: add an antlib (and optional task) loader to ant 1.7

Sorry for asking for another vote on the Classloader for ant issue, but I think that the last vote was very half-hearted in slight support of including the (new) classloader task. However, I think that there was not enough support. In the meantime, I have been looking at Jesse's idea to have a "se

Re: AW: Ant 1.7 - ReleaseInstructions - Compiler

Hello Jan, Ant 1.6 was compiled using 1.4 For the sake of simplicity I will try to build Ant 1.7 with 1.5 because we have 2 classes which use 1.5 APIs. Regards, Antoine On Aug 24, 2006, at 10:02 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: We say to need Java 1.2

AW: Ant 1.7 - ReleaseInstructions - Compiler

>Betreff: Re: Ant 1.7 - ReleaseInstructions - Compiler > > >On 21 Aug 2006, at 21:19, Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote: > >> Hello Kev, >> >> when you built the alpha version of ant 1.7, which compiler did you >> use ? 1.4 or 1.5 ? >> >I used the default com

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40152] - rmic: Ant 1.7 adds -vcompat when building iiop stubs

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

RE: Ant 1.7 - ReleaseInstructions - Compiler

> -Original Message- > From: Kev Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, 22 August 2006 9:59 AM > To: Ant Developers List > Subject: Re: Ant 1.7 - ReleaseInstructions - Compiler > > > On 21 Aug 2006, at 21:19, Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote: > >

Re: Ant 1.7 - ReleaseInstructions - Compiler

On 21 Aug 2006, at 21:19, Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote: Hello Kev, when you built the alpha version of ant 1.7, which compiler did you use ? 1.4 or 1.5 ? I used the default compiler, which at the moment is 1.5 Kev -- "I call it the State where everyone, good or bad, is a poison- dr

Ant 1.7 - ReleaseInstructions - Compiler

Hello Kev, when you built the alpha version of ant 1.7, which compiler did you use ? 1.4 or 1.5 ? Regards, Antoine - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40152] - rmic: Ant 1.7 adds -vcompat when building iiop stubs

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40152] - rmic: Ant 1.7 adds -vcompat when building iiop stubs

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40152] - rmic: Ant 1.7 adds -vcompat when building iiop stubs

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40152] - rmic: Ant 1.7 adds -vcompat when building iiop stubs

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 40152] New: - rmic: Ant 1.7 adds -vcompat when building iiop stubs

gzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40152 Summary: rmic: Ant 1.7 adds -vcompat when building iiop stubs Product: Ant Version: 1.7Alpha (nightly) Platform: Other OS/Version: OpenVMS Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P3 Com

Re: Ant 1.7 alpha available for testing...

You have something that works but will not scale. You know that, don't you? Absolutely - but then I'm being paid to implement a spec, not to suggest an alternative solution. This is the way it works in the outsourcing/offshoring dev world - we just get a spec and have to implement it reg

Re: Ant 1.7 alpha available for testing...

Kev Jackson wrote: yes, cfengine and lcfg can keep your stuff in control. There's also games you can play with vmware/xen hosted images, where the real CPUs just host the virtual machines, and those you replicate off managed "gold" images. It's funny that you mention this, as my current pro

Re: Ant 1.7 alpha available for testing...

Steve Loughran wrote: > That sounds like quite a rigorous process. > > yes, cfengine and lcfg can keep your stuff in control. There's also > games you can play with vmware/xen hosted images, where the real CPUs just host the virtual machines, and those you replicate off managed "gold" images.

Re: Ant 1.7 alpha available for testing...

Steve Loughran wrote: jfuller wrote: Steve Loughran wrote: jfuller wrote: Looks good during my first checks. looks good on OSX 10.4.6, will be testing this release on a 'serious' build server farm over the weekend (rhe4). how many servers constitutes serious? the system cons

Re: Ant 1.7 alpha available for testing...

yes, cfengine and lcfg can keep your stuff in control. There's also games you can play with vmware/xen hosted images, where the real CPUs just host the virtual machines, and those you replicate off managed "gold" images. It's funny that you mention this, as my current project is working o

Re: Ant 1.7 alpha available for testing...

jfuller wrote: Steve Loughran wrote: jfuller wrote: Looks good during my first checks. looks good on OSX 10.4.6, will be testing this release on a 'serious' build server farm over the weekend (rhe4). how many servers constitutes serious? the system consists of 6 servers, in pairs

Re: Ant 1.7 alpha available for testing...

Steve Loughran wrote: jfuller wrote: Looks good during my first checks. looks good on OSX 10.4.6, will be testing this release on a 'serious' build server farm over the weekend (rhe4). how many servers constitutes serious? the system consists of 6 servers, in pairs of 2 (dev/critic

Re: Ant 1.7 alpha available for testing...

jfuller wrote: Looks good during my first checks. looks good on OSX 10.4.6, will be testing this release on a 'serious' build server farm over the weekend (rhe4). how many servers constitutes serious? - To unsubscribe

Re: Ant 1.7 alpha available for testing...

Looks good during my first checks. looks good on OSX 10.4.6, will be testing this release on a 'serious' build server farm over the weekend (rhe4). -- Jim Fuller --- FlameDigital Limited | Webcomposite s.r.o. Technical Director Co-Author WROX Pro PHP4 XML, WROX Pro PHP Web Service

Re: Ant 1.7 alpha available for testing...

I'm not sure I like the version number. No problem with the Saigon bit, but should be 1.7.0alpha. Looks good during my first checks. Stefan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PRO

Re: Ant 1.7 alpha available for testing...

--- Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Kev: > I notice that get-m2.xml is missing from the root of > the jar; er... tar I mean. :) > fetch.xml now depends on it. Where did it > go? :) > > -Matt > > --- Kev Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Fixed the download probl

Re: Ant 1.7 alpha available for testing...

Kev: I notice that get-m2.xml is missing from the root of the jar; fetch.xml now depends on it. Where did it go? :) -Matt --- Kev Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Fixed the download problem with some .htaccess mojo, > so for your > approval and delight: > > http://people.apache

Ant 1.7 alpha available for testing...

Hi, Fixed the download problem with some .htaccess mojo, so for your approval and delight: http://people.apache.org/~kevj is now hosting the latest build. KNOWN PROBLEMS: - ManifestTest fails on OSX 10.4 with Java5 I looked at this and cannot see why it's failing - the recent changes may

Re: Ant 1.7 release

On Sat, 10 Jun 2006, Jesse Glick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> Java 5 adds a completely new sort of problems with APIs retrofitted >> to support generics. Since Comparable is now Comparable the >> BigInteger class used to have a method int compareTo(Object) and >> now has

Re: Ant 1.7 release

Kev Jackson wrote: I can build all the ant-* jars except ant-starteam and ant-weblogic I've contacted borland regarding getting access to starteam sdk without having to sign up to some ridiculous trial/download nonsense. [...] Note that we could set up separate source roots containing phony cl

Re: Ant 1.7 release

Stefan Bodewig wrote: Say there is a method void doSomething(Object o); in a class inside the Java class library of JDK 1.3 and a new overload void doSomething(String s); was added in JDK 1.4. Any call to doSomething("") compiled on JDK 1.4 and above will pick the String signature

Re: Ant 1.7 release

On 5 Jun 2006, at 03:08, Steve Loughran wrote: Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote: Hi, I am having a look at http://wiki.apache.org/ant/Ant17/Planning We are still on the step "finding a release manager" Do we have any candidates ? I'm tempted to do it but can't as I am three chapters out from fin

Re: Ant 1.7 release

Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote: Hi, I am having a look at http://wiki.apache.org/ant/Ant17/Planning We are still on the step "finding a release manager" Do we have any candidates ? I'm tempted to do it but can't as I am three chapters out from finishing the text of the book, then its all the o

Re: Re: Ant 1.7 release

to compile I think, so we could change it too. In this case we could build Ant 1.7 in one shot using JDK 1.4 like 1.6. We must find a solution which is simple for the release manager. We also need to automate other steps of the release process such as PGP signing the build artifacts. Regards

Re: Ant 1.7 release

We simply can't. Leaving the generics/erasure problem aside, there is a way to ensure you don't compile against methods that are too new, but it is painful: start building with JDK 1.2, compile what hasn't been compiled by building with JDK 1.3, repeat with JDK 1.4 and 1.5. What about "cross-co

Re: Ant 1.7 release

Hi, I am going to make these jars available to Kevin. Regards, Antoine Kev Jackson wrote: > A quick update regarding my situation trying to build a test release > dist. > > I can now bootstrap everything except starteam and weblogic. I'm also > having a strange issue with Echo not compiling in

Re: Ant 1.7 release

A quick update regarding my situation trying to build a test release dist. I can now bootstrap everything except starteam and weblogic. I'm also having a strange issue with Echo not compiling in eclipse (but works fine from command line). ie, I can build all the ant-* jars except ant-sta

Re: Ant 1.7 release

Kev Jackson wrote: > > On 1 Jun 2006, at 10:02, Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I am having a look at http://wiki.apache.org/ant/Ant17/Planning >> >> We are still on the step "finding a release manager" >> >> Do we have any candidates ? >> > > I'd be happy to help, but before I offer

Re: Ant 1.7 release

On 2 Jun 2006, at 11:37, Stefan Bodewig wrote: On Fri, 2 Jun 2006, Kev Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 2 Jun 2006, at 11:16, Stefan Bodewig wrote: Object signature alternative. It is impossible to compile code on JDK 1.5 that uses the method and still works on JDK 1.4 - but the opp

Re: Ant 1.7 release

On Fri, 2 Jun 2006, Kev Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2 Jun 2006, at 11:16, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > >> Object signature alternative. It is impossible to compile code on >> JDK 1.5 that uses the method and still works on JDK 1.4 - but the >> opposite is also true > > This leaves us i

Re: Ant 1.7 release

On 2 Jun 2006, at 11:16, Stefan Bodewig wrote: Object signature alternative. It is impossible to compile code on JDK 1.5 that uses the method and still works on JDK 1.4 - but the opposite is also true This leaves us in a pickle unless we can guarantee that the every line of code will both

Re: Ant 1.7 release

On Thu, 1 Jun 2006, Jan Materne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>Not sure if we can build Ant 1.7 under JDK 1.5 also all in one >>go and still produce jars which can run under 1.2. > > Should be possible (but I would do a test after the build...) > > http://java.su

Re: Ant 1.7 release

hough realistically I'd only build it under my main machine as the others are not setup as dev boxes. I built Ant 1.6 under Windows 2000 with a Sun JDK 1.4, all in one go. It looks like that Ant 1.7 has classes which require to be built under JDK 1.5. Well I can certainly build a test

Re: AW: Ant 1.7 release

> Original-Nachricht > Datum: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 16:36:11 +0200 > Von: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > An: > Betreff: AW: Ant 1.7 release > > >Not sure if we can build Ant 1.7 under JDK 1.5 also all in one > >go and still produce jars which can run und

AW: Ant 1.7 release

>Not sure if we can build Ant 1.7 under JDK 1.5 also all in one >go and still produce jars which can run under 1.2. Should be possible (but I would do a test after the build...) http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/tooldocs/windows/javac.html -target version Generate class files that wil

Re: Ant 1.7 release

ke. Concerning the system, any operating system is good. I built Ant 1.6 under Windows 2000 with a Sun JDK 1.4, all in one go. It looks like that Ant 1.7 has classes which require to be built under JDK 1.5. Not sure if we can build Ant 1.7 under JDK 1.5 also

Re: Ant 1.7 release

On 1 Jun 2006, at 10:02, Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote: Hi, I am having a look at http://wiki.apache.org/ant/Ant17/Planning We are still on the step "finding a release manager" Do we have any candidates ? I'd be happy to help, but before I offer myself as the 'release manager', what would

Ant 1.7 release

Hi, I am having a look at http://wiki.apache.org/ant/Ant17/Planning We are still on the step "finding a release manager" Do we have any candidates ? Regards, Antoine - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional

Re: Ant 1.7 beta?

Its on my todo list to do full deployment from smartfrog to the various app servers, even though we tend to use jetty in-process for our day to day work. Lightweight, easily configured, self-contained. I'll have to try jetty, it's been on my list of web containers to try for donkey's years.

Re: Ant 1.7 beta?

Kev Jackson wrote: I'm trying to set up a conf call with the junit team, to see how best to go with the junit4 support. I am currently thinking - stays 3.8.x only. -we add a new junit antlib for junit4 support, design it to work on 1.6.5 and 1.7 -maybe hand off ownership of the antlib to the

Re: Ant 1.7 beta?

I'm trying to set up a conf call with the junit team, to see how best to go with the junit4 support. I am currently thinking - stays 3.8.x only. -we add a new junit antlib for junit4 support, design it to work on 1.6.5 and 1.7 -maybe hand off ownership of the antlib to the junit team, if they

Re: Ant 1.7 beta?

( I just replied using the wrong from: address, so it probably wont go through. lets try again) Kev Jackson wrote: to allow adding of jars to the current classloader (would solve a /lot/ of problems at the cost of some issues)[peter] (status RE "some issues" risk? -MJB) Prima

Re: Ant 1.7 beta?

Kev Jackson wrote: Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote: Kev Jackson wrote: Hi, Checked the planning wiki this morning and noticed that the release schedule for the first beta of 1.7 is set at May/June this year. Since this is rapidly approaching, what are the thoughts on a: timing, each releas

Re: Ant 1.7 beta?

Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote: Kev Jackson wrote: Hi, Checked the planning wiki this morning and noticed that the release schedule for the first beta of 1.7 is set at May/June this year. Since this is rapidly approaching, what are the thoughts on a: timing, each release requires a vote.

Re: Ant 1.7 beta?

Kev Jackson wrote: > Hi, > > Checked the planning wiki this morning and noticed that the release > schedule for the first beta of 1.7 is set at May/June this year. > > Since this is rapidly approaching, what are the thoughts on > a: timing, each release requires a vote. A vote is open one week. but

Ant 1.7 beta?

Hi, Checked the planning wiki this morning and noticed that the release schedule for the first beta of 1.7 is set at May/June this year. Since this is rapidly approaching, what are the thoughts on a: timing, b: fixes/features that still need to go in before release c: anything else Kev ---

Re: Ant 1.7 NullPointerException AbstractFileSet and OOM error

Matt, Just verified your changes have fixed the problem relating to Cargo and the NullPointer I was experiencing - thanks for looking into it for me. Kev - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-

Re: Ant 1.7 NullPointerException AbstractFileSet and OOM error

On 4/18/06, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, I checked out appfuse, DL'd Tomcat... then it > wants mysql, which I just don't have time to install > too right now. :) I will check in my changes anyway. Thanks, I have all these installed as my 'day job' is server-side/web-app java, s

Re: Ant 1.7 NullPointerException AbstractFileSet and OOM error

use-appgen2\extras > > BUILD FAILED > C:\Source\appfuse\extras\appgen\build.xml:639: The > following error > occurred while executing this lin > e: > C:\Source\appfuse\extras\appgen\build.xml:546: The > following error >

Re: Ant 1.7 NullPointerException AbstractFileSet and OOM error

n\build.xml:546: The following error occurred while executing this lin e: java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space Total time: 4 minutes 9 seconds << Ant 1.7 fails when trying to execute the cargo config, long before the heap space issue (probably within ~1 min). Kev

Re: Ant 1.7 NullPointerException AbstractFileSet and OOM error

--- Kev Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hm, > > In the cargo code we have: > > /** > * Remove all file in the configuration directory. > */ > private void cleanConfigurationDirectory() > { > // Clean up stuff previously put in the > temporary directory but do not > // remove t

Re: Ant 1.7 NullPointerException AbstractFileSet and OOM error

Hm, In the cargo code we have: /** * Remove all file in the configuration directory. */ private void cleanConfigurationDirectory() { // Clean up stuff previously put in the temporary directory but do not // remove the Cargo timestamp file Delete delete = (Delete) getAntUtils().create

Re: Ant 1.7 NullPointerException AbstractFileSet

Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote: Hello Kev, the question is which piece of code creates the filesets which are added here to the delete task. this piece of code is probably creating the filesets in such a way that the project field is not set. I imagine this happens in the org.codehaus.cargo.contain

Re: Ant 1.7 NullPointerException AbstractFileSet

and I can't see any > changes to AbstractFileSet since 1.6.5 was released (June 2005). > > Anyone have any idea why the project isn't set? > > works > JDK1.5 > Ant 1.6.5 > > fails > JDK1.5 > Ant 1.7 (trunk) compiled today against JDK1.5 > > Windows XP SP2 >

Ant 1.7 NullPointerException AbstractFileSet

and I can't see any changes to AbstractFileSet since 1.6.5 was released (June 2005). Anyone have any idea why the project isn't set? works JDK1.5 Ant 1.6.5 fails JDK1.5 Ant 1.7 (trunk) compiled today against JDK1.5 Windows XP SP2 Stack trace: org.codehaus.cargo.container.ContainerExcep

  1   2   3   >