On Wednesday 19 November 2003 09:46, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, peter reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 18 November 2003 15:32, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> >> Your proposal uses a task that sets up a local scope for a
> >> named property until the enclosing target/sequ
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Jose Alberto Fernandez
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> From: peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> On Tuesday 18 November 2003 15:32, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
> Just for the record, my syntax was more like:
>
>
> ...
>
OK, I didn't actua
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, peter reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 November 2003 15:32, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>> Your proposal uses a task that sets up a local scope for a
>> named property until the enclosing target/sequential finishes.
>> Jose Alberto suggested to use a TaskContainer
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, peter reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 November 2003 15:53, peter reilly wrote:
>
>> me) more natural. However, I can see benefits ;- my code may not
> Opps that should of course be "the" code and not "my" code.
Don't worry 8-)
Stefan
--
On Tuesday 18 November 2003 18:14, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> > From: peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > On Tuesday 18 November 2003 17:05, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> > > My major issue with the current implementation proposal is that it
> > > touches way too many places in th
> From: peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> On Tuesday 18 November 2003 17:05, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> >
> > My major issue with the current implementation proposal is that it
> > touches way too many places in the code. It needs to change the
> > implemention of almost all the u
On Tuesday 18 November 2003 17:05, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> > From: peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > On Tuesday 18 November 2003 15:32, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> > > Things we need to consider IMHO:
> > >
> > > (1) Syntax
> > >
> > > Your proposal uses a task that sets up a loca
> From: peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> On Tuesday 18 November 2003 15:32, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> >
> > Things we need to consider IMHO:
> >
> > (1) Syntax
> >
> > Your proposal uses a task that sets up a local scope for a
> > named property until the enclosing target/sequential
>
On Tuesday 18 November 2003 15:53, peter reilly wrote:
> me) more natural. However, I can see benefits ;- my code may not
Opps that should of course be "the" code and not "my" code.
Peter
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECT
On Tuesday 18 November 2003 15:32, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On 18 Nov 2003, Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, peter reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Vote:
> >> [X] local for ant 1.6
> >> [ ] wait for ant 1.7
> >
> > and done right ;-)
Ouch ;-)
>
> Things we n
10 matches
Mail list logo