Conor MacNeill wrote: > So, I am +1 on integration, certainly making it optional. If it remains > separate, and that seems likely, then perhaps it should be made a core task > rather than being optional. It has no non-JDK dependencies. > > Conor
I think I'm going to bow to the wisdom of others at this point. My biggest concern with integrating <depends> into <javac> was that it sounded like we were going to do away with depends as a separate task at the same time, and have no choice about running the integrated dependancy checking. I think I may have just misread the intent of the issue. That being said, I'll change my -1 a +0. I don't think its necessary, but it sure as heck can't hurt if its optional and we don't do away with <depends>. Glenn
