Sam, > -----Original Message----- > From: Sam Ruby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, 10 January 2001 2:40 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [BUG?] Java Task adds Ant Classpath when forking > > > [ copying Daniel as I'm not sure he follows Ant-dev, in any case, > I haven't > seem him recently here; Daniel the full text of Conor's reply is below ] > > Daniel, the change was identional, with the rationalle (and consensus with > only Peter Donald essentially abstaining) that the previous behavior of > ignoring the user's classpath was a bug. Peter's concern was that this > change was not backwards compatible, and the fact that this change has > affected you to the point that you found it worth reporting as a potential > bug certainly adds validity to this concern. I would be very > interested in > your opinion after you have read this note.
I too have found this to break my builds. In my case, I can probably get around it by setting my classpath appropriately. I'll give you my example, albeit somewhat weblogic centric. I run a minimal classpath with just weblogic/classes in it to supply the DTD for ejbjar (I actually want this requirement to go away). When I run ejbjar, however, I place a weblogic service pack jar in front of weblogic/classes. This is pretty important. Ant's new behaviour means the weblogic/classes from my classpath ends up in front. It also means that ant's parser is being used in place of weblogic's. That is probably not a good thing. In the light of this experience, I would like the default changed to ignore. Thoughts? > > > Conor, as much as possible I would like tasks like <available> and <java> > to interpret the classpath when specified in the same manner. It seems > much more error prone to expect each user of the class loader to act in a > precisely similar manner than it is to embedd this logic inside of the > class loader, but I recognize that opinions may vary. I guess it is just about expectations and coupling. If I give a class loader a classpath, I expect it to use this classpath and not tack on something to the classpath. This seems like a side-effect to me. Such "higher-order" behaviour belongs in the class loader users (available and java). > In any case, adding > the system class path in accordance to the value of the property is only a > single method call, so the code bloat is managable. > > - Sam Ruby > Conor
