To whom it may engage...
This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For
more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html,
and/or contact the folk at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Project svn-antlib-test has an issue affecting its community integration.
This issue affe
> Which one would you prefer? Or should we invent a new one?
Use an existing one of course. There could also be more than one,
just supported by a "language" attribute.
> We do have the "clumsy" XML expression language that we built into the
> condition task and it follows the rest of Ant's "lan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Has the possibility of adding multiple conditions to the target 'if' and
'unless' attributes ever been considered? Are there any reasons why this
change would be a bad idea?
I have found Groovy (and to a lesser degree other scripting
languages) to be very useful
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Has the possibility of adding multiple conditions to the target 'if' and
'unless' attributes ever been considered? Are there any reasons why this
change would be a bad idea?
I have found Groovy (and to a lesser degree other scripting
languages) to be very useful
Apache Wiki wrote:
Dear Wiki user,
You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Ant Wiki" for change
notification.
The following page has been changed by heatherfox:
http://wiki.apache.org/ant/ExternalResources
---
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, Alexey Solofnenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
About property expansion - many languages use the same syntax for
inline property substitution. It may be good not to expand
properties automatically.
That's the reason it hasn't been implemented, exactly.
Wolfgang Häfelinger wrote:
Which one would you prefer? Or should we invent a new one?
Use an existing one of course. There could also be more than one,
just supported by a "language" attribute.
We do have the "clumsy" XML expression language that we built into the
condition task and it follo
> -What is the existing one you'd recommend? XPath 1.0? Perl?
> Pascal-style, Ruby-Style?
I implemented the "test" expression logic found in popular shells, left a
couple of
tests out (like -p, -O etc) and added a couple of usefull tests like
-P s => test whether "s" is a reference
-R s => t
Riedel Thomas (KSFD 121) wrote:
Yes I agree the kind of our Ant-usage might be a bit beyond horizon. We
are doing continious integration for a 5 Mio LOC project, generic
automated junit testing, automatic deploying into a production like
server pool, online testing, web-testing, automated metrics
Here is a simple example showing how flexible, easy, and legible this
is:
This provid
On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>> On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, Alexey Solofnenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> About property expansion - many languages use the same syntax for
>>> inline property substitution. It may be good not to expand
>>> pro
On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Wolfgang Häfelinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Which one would you prefer? Or should we invent a new one?
>
> Use an existing one of course. There could also be more than one,
> just supported by a "language" attribute.
This is the approach the NAnt folks have chosen, you
> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Loughran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Apologies for the delay in responding (have been
swamped with moving house and the cup).
> > I think that part of the problem here is that Ant is
> > bootstrapping itself from nothing and as a
> > consequence w
>> -split out libraries for execution, java exec, other misc things
>> -complete programmatic use of ant without problems
>
>I'm thinking along the lines of moving the ant codebase
>structure to something that reflects a project codebase per
>jar file where each project (a.k.a. ant-sub-project)
14 matches
Mail list logo
