DO NOT REPLY [Bug 24122] - Other Compilers

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://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

ejbclientjar task - separate project?

Hi, The bugzilla bug 23396 (enhancement) with a new "ejbclientjar" task has not been touched by anyone yet. I've been wondering if I instead should do what many others have done, namely creating a project at sf.net and place the new task there, and then simply get it referenced from "External

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 24143] New: - ejbjar verify not working with borland appserver 5.2.1

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://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

RE: Tale from the front: macrodef nesting

> From: Steve Cohen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I am now trying to experiment with some of the new features > of ant 1.6. Here's a real-world example of the difficulties > of trying to replace antcalls with macrodefs. > > Given the following definitions, notice that I am trying to > nest a

RE: Tale from the front: macrodef nesting

You're correct about working around this problem. However, I think it's still a problem that the same ${identifier} notation can either indicate a macrodef attribute or an ant property with completely different times of resolution. In other words, the line of warning in the ant manual -- "This a

RE: Tale from the front: macrodef nesting

> From: Steve Cohen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > You're correct about working around this problem. However, I think it's > still a problem that the same > ${identifier} notation can either indicate a macrodef attribute or an > ant property with completely different times of resolution. > > In o

RE: Tale from the front: macrodef nesting

Sorry to say I wasn't involved in the discussion at that time. What were the arguments against using an alternative notation? -Original Message- From: Dominique Devienne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 9:33 AM To: 'Ant Developers List' Subject: RE: Tale from the

cvs commit: ant/src/testcases/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs/optional/sitraka ClassFileTest.java

antoine 2003/10/27 10:29:53 Modified:src/testcases/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs/optional/sitraka ClassFileTest.java Log: Make org.apache.tools.ant.taskdefs.optional.sitraka.ClassFileTest pass under JDK 1.2 PR: 23919 Submitted by: Martijn Kruithof (ant a

cvs commit: ant/src/testcases/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs/optional/sitraka ClassFileTest.java

antoine 2003/10/27 10:32:13 Modified:src/testcases/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs/optional/sitraka Tag: ANT_16_BRANCH ClassFileTest.java Log: Merge from HEAD Prevent ClassFileTest from failing under JDK 1.2 PR: 23919 Submitted by: Martijn Kruithof Re

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 23919] - [PATCH] ClassFileTest with jdk 1.2.2

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://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: cvs commit: ant/src/testcases/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs/optional/sitraka ClassFileTest.java

Hi I also verified my patch against jdk 1.4.2 and IBM jdk 1.4.1 and am sure it keeps running. The numerals in assertHasMethod are lower limits according to the test case, so the if is not necessery and furthermore makes in necessary to also verify again against jdk 1.3 and ibm jdk's. Furthermore

AW: cvs commit: ant/src/testcases/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs/optional/sitraka ClassFileTest.java

You are right Martijn, I will revert to your original patch. Cheers, Antoine -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: Martijn Kruithof [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Montag, 27. Oktober 2003 20:05 An: Ant Developers List Betreff: Re: cvs commit: ant/src/testcases/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs/o

AL task anyone?

There seems one task missing from .Net tasks - any plans to add it? Should I file a bug report? - Alexey. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 24162] New: - Add option to prevent Ant from blocking on exec task process

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://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

Re: AL task anyone?

Alexey N. Solofnenko wrote: There seems one task missing from .Net tasks - any plans to add it? Should I file a bug report? the process is that the .net tasks are being written on demand, as and when the authors need them. So if you need an AL task, now would be a good time to write it. I do a

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 24162] - Add option to prevent Ant from blocking on exec task process

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://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu

DO NOT REPLY [Bug 24166] New: - CCUpdate.java should use -force parameter to 'cleartool update'

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://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bu