John D. Casey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm not sure if this got through last night (sent it from another > email address...), so I'll say it again to ensure coverage.
At least I haven't seen it. > 1. You're using a build file with a target "init", and you include > a fragment that also has a target "init". There's a problem. Agreed. > While I understand that I'm partially shooting myself in the foot And agreed again 8-). What you are talking about might fit better into a concept where one project might depend on a target defined in another project - the keywords here are workspace and DAG when looking into the requirements list for Ant2 or searching the archives for some threads dating back to the end of last year. Expect a new discussion on this topic in a few weeks. > 2. The syntax isn't exactly mainstream for Ant usage. It's the builtin way of including something in SGML. It has some drawbacks - and being ugly is a minor one. It doesn't mix with XSchema for example - <xsl:include> might be an option but would require an XSLT processor. A homemade include mechanism would be possible of course, but it wouldn't have the charm of a standard compliant solution. Stefan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
