Michael McCallum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [the quoted question below is mine - Stefan]
>>why should Task be an interface? > Basically it is not necessary for task to be an abstract/conrete > class. It depends on how strong you want to make the contract between Tasks and the core. If you want to make sure that Task.getLogger always returns the logger from the TaskContext supplied earlier, you cannot do that when relying on interfaces only - same for all the other things Peter calls aspects of a task. If you provide an interface and tell people "but you must implement method X so that ..." there is not much you gain, just to avoid adapters in cases where you need to extend another class for your task. In Ant1 Task is an abstract class and we provide TaskAdapter for all other situations - is anybody using TaskAdapter? Stefan
