RE: Ant2

2002-01-28 Thread GOMEZ Henri
>Costin >P.S. I can volunteer to write the Makefiles, since soon this may be the >cleanest way to build tomcat... I hope it's a joke ?) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail:

Re: Ant2

2002-01-27 Thread Bojan Smojver
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Maybe I'm crazy, but so far I did a lot of the build.xml changes every > time a new ant was released, with all the pain of trying (without > success ) to make it work with the old version and the new one. Maybe we should somehow motivate Ant people to write a convers

Re: Ant2

2002-01-25 Thread Craig R. McClanahan
On Fri, 25 Jan 2002, Josh Nylander wrote: > Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 14:43:25 -0800 > From: Josh Nylander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: Tomcat Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Ant2 > > I know little of ant and probably

Re: Ant2

2002-01-25 Thread Josh Nylander
. Just my $0.02 Josh >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 01/25/02 01:35PM >>> > On Fri, 25 Jan 2002, Remy Maucherat wrote: > > > If we don't like Ant 2, why would we have to use it ? If it introduces big > > changes in build.xml, why upgrade when Ant 1 works fine ? >

Re: Ant2

2002-01-25 Thread Remy Maucherat
> On Fri, 25 Jan 2002, Remy Maucherat wrote: > > > If we don't like Ant 2, why would we have to use it ? If it introduces big > > changes in build.xml, why upgrade when Ant 1 works fine ? > > Sooner or later ant2 will be released and people will start using it in &

Re: Ant2

2002-01-25 Thread costinm
On Fri, 25 Jan 2002, Sam Ruby wrote: > > I'll try. The attribute deprecation between 1.3 and 1.4 was IMHO completey > > unjustified, and if 1.5 does the same we'll have the same problem once > > again. > > There is no need to try. I daily build the latest Tomcat 3 against the > latest Ant... if

Re: Ant2

2002-01-25 Thread Sam Ruby
Costin Manolache wrote: > >> 1.5 deprecates more attrbutes, BTW (don't know if you tried building Tomcat >> with it). > > I'll try. The attribute deprecation between 1.3 and 1.4 was IMHO completey > unjustified, and if 1.5 does the same we'll have the same problem once > again. There is no need t

Re: Ant2

2002-01-25 Thread costinm
t > with it). I'll try. The attribute deprecation between 1.3 and 1.4 was IMHO completey unjustified, and if 1.5 does the same we'll have the same problem once again. > If we don't like Ant 2, why would we have to use it ? If it introduces big > changes in build.xml, why u

Re: Ant2

2002-01-25 Thread Pier Fumagalli
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't know if you follow ant-dev, but there are some discussions about > the new version of ant which are extremely scarry for me. > > Things like throwing exceptions when a property is not defined, > changing the build.xml syntax, and so on. > >

Re: Ant2

2002-01-25 Thread Remy Maucherat
> I don't know if you follow ant-dev, Nope. > but there are some discussions about > the new version of ant which are extremely scarry for me. > > Things like throwing exceptions when a property is not defined, > changing the build.xml syntax, and so on. > > Maybe I'm crazy, but so far I did a l

Ant2

2002-01-25 Thread cmanolache
I don't know if you follow ant-dev, but there are some discussions about the new version of ant which are extremely scarry for me. Things like throwing exceptions when a property is not defined, changing the build.xml syntax, and so on. Maybe I'm crazy, but so far I did a lot of the build.xml ch