Re: and s

Dominique Devienne wrote: I prefer to keep my build files shorter, as they are already definitely too long. Mine are actually quite small now that I all the common parts from a small set of 'abstract' build files. (and by 'abstract' I mean "meant to imported" as opposed to necessarily having 'abst

RE: and s

> I prefer to keep my build files shorter, as they are > already definitely too long. Mine are actually quite small now that I all the common parts from a small set of 'abstract' build files. (and by 'abstract' I mean "meant to imported" as opposed to necessarily having 'abstract' targets). > So

AW: and s

> I think it's just a different design. > In mine the "common" build file already contains everything I > need for a > typical project out of the box. > The purpose of the including build file is just to add/rewrite/extend > custom stuff. For very basic projects it just adds a target > to pack

Re: and s

Jacob Kjome wrote: I also tend to define a path that is empty, but referenced by one of the other standard paths. That way, I can override that empty path and the pathelements will get included in the standard path by reference. Hopefully that's what you are looking for. Yes it is. Thanks everyone

Re: and s

Dominique Devienne wrote: Yeah, it should work. But I prefer to have a callable/complete common.xml. I guess that strikes me as strange. I've designed at least 3 quite large multiple-build-files Ant builds for mixed C/C++/Java projects using , and the build files I import are never callable directl

Re: and s

I've been specifying paths in an file which is loaded by the common build file and used by other build files by importing the common build file. All build files use the same build structure so the paths are always applicable to all builds. I also tend to define a path that is empty, but referenc

@standardbank.co.za [WAS: FW: and s]

Developers List Subject: FW: and s Everytime I post I get this stupid message! Can it be blocked somehow, and the person who registered from this company use his/her 'correct' address format... --DD -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday,

RE: and s

> -Original Message- > From: Stefano Mancarella [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Dominique Devienne wrote: > > Note that by putting the extension classpath before the , > > and removing the it from common.xml, this works fine, and has the > > advantage of failing the build is the importing bu

Re: and s

Dominique Devienne wrote: Note that by putting the extension classpath before the , and removing the it from common.xml, this works fine, and has the advantage of failing the build is the importing build file does not declare a path with the required ID. But it also makes the common build file inco

AW: and s

> An: Ant Users List > Betreff: RE: and s > > Note that by putting the extension classpath before the , > and removing the it from common.xml, this works fine, and has the > advantage of failing the build is the importing build file does > not declare a path with the required I

RE: and s

7;s more a side effect than by design, far from being either obvious or elegant, but it should work nonetheless (although I didn't try it). --DD > -Original Message- > From: Stefano Mancarella [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 7:09 AM > To: Ant

Re: and s

Peter Reilly wrote: This will cause the annoying Overriding previous definition of reference to classpath.additional message. Yeah. I already got that when I redefined the path. There is a bug report requesting the reduction of this message to verbose, perhaps this would be a good thing to do! I ag

Re: AW: and s

common.xml because its references there. In your tasks you only refer to "classpath". Jan -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Stefano Mancarella [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet am: Mittwoch, 6. Oktober 2004 10:38 An: Ant Users List Betreff: and s Is there a way to reuse path de

Re: and s

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: common.xml: --- The "classpath.additional" has to defined in the common.xml because its references there. So basically "classpath" has to be _prepared_ for extension by referencing another path ("classpath.additional") which I can overr

AW: and s

04 10:38 > An: Ant Users List > Betreff: and s > > Is there a way to reuse path definitions when using , > in a way > similar to what you can do with targets? > > I've a standard path defined in a common build file, which is > good for > almost all m

and s

Is there a way to reuse path definitions when using , in a way similar to what you can do with targets? I've a standard path defined in a common build file, which is good for almost all my projects. When I need to change it I'm forced to redefine it completely, even when it would be better to e