http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1380
*** shadow/1380 Thu Jun 21 07:25:54 2001 --- shadow/1380.tmp.24500 Wed Jul 4 13:29:28 2001 *************** *** 2,11 **** | I think that having conditional fails make more robust build files. | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Bug #: 1380 Product: Ant | ! | Status: NEW Version: 1.3 | ! | Resolution: Platform: All | | Severity: Enhancement OS/Version: All | ! | Priority: Component: Core tasks | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Assigned To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Reported By: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | --- 2,11 ---- | I think that having conditional fails make more robust build files. | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Bug #: 1380 Product: Ant | ! | Status: RESOLVED Version: 1.3 | ! | Resolution: REMIND Platform: All | | Severity: Enhancement OS/Version: All | ! | Priority: High Component: Core tasks | +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Assigned To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Reported By: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | *************** *** 36,39 **** ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2001-06-21 07:25 ------- ! *** Bug 1997 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** --- 36,51 ---- ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2001-06-21 07:25 ------- ! *** Bug 1997 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** ! ! ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2001-07-04 13:29 ------- ! The problem I'm having with this issue is that we don't allow if/unless on any ! other tasks. Why should we make an exception for this one? I agree that for ! the particular use case it is a useful enhancement; I'm not a huge fan of having ! a million targets to inform a use of what error they have in a file. However, ! I'm not sure that this use case outweighs our desire to remain consistent in our ! use of if/unless (Please don't laugh... :-). ! ! I think this one might have to wait to be reevaluated for Ant2. ! ! Comments?
