Re: [Patch] keep-going feature

2003-07-15 Thread peter reilly
I have prepared a patch to do this for subant. I have also modified the keep-going patch for Project.java to do the right thing (I think) when throwing exceptions. Cheers, (keep those fans going) Peter On Wed, 2003-07-09 at 16:21, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 09 Jul 2003, peter reilly <[EMAIL PROTE

Re: [Patch] keep-going feature

2003-07-09 Thread Stefan Bodewig
On 09 Jul 2003, peter reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > but could be left out unless people ask for it. OK, let's apply YAGNI here. It wouldn't be too hard to add later anyway. > I suppose to be correct, subant should look at its > project's keepGoingMode value and dup the logic from > the p

Re: [Patch] keep-going feature

2003-07-09 Thread peter reilly
On Wed, 2003-07-09 at 16:02, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 09 Jul 2003, peter reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Maybe , and (<*ant*>?) should get a new > >> attribute as well? > > > > The keep-going attribute gets passed to the subprojects in > > Project#initSubProject() (which is called by

Re: [Patch] keep-going feature

2003-07-09 Thread Stefan Bodewig
On 09 Jul 2003, peter reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Maybe , and (<*ant*>?) should get a new >> attribute as well? > > The keep-going attribute gets passed to the subprojects in > Project#initSubProject() (which is called by et al). Well, yes, but what if I want to pass keep-going to a

Re: [Patch] keep-going feature

2003-07-09 Thread peter reilly
On Wed, 2003-07-09 at 07:54, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Alexey Solofnenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Actually the reason to implement keep-alive (originally keep-going) > > is to find as many problems as possible. It is done by executing all > > targets that do not depend di

Re: [Patch] keep-going feature

2003-07-09 Thread peter reilly
My description was meant to explain the proposal, but I got the explanation incorrect. Alexey provided a better explanation, >Actually the reason to implement keep-alive (originally keep-going) is to >find as many problems as possible. It is done by executing all targets that >do not depend directl

RE: [Patch] keep-going feature

2003-07-08 Thread peter reilly
Opps, sorry that should be keep-going (anyway). Yep, you are right the build does fail, so it is not equivalent to an implicit fail-on-error attribute on each target (which I think would be extremely confusing). Peter. ps: perhaps we could put the link in the main ant page just after the "mak