On Thu, 2 May 2002 07:04, Erik Hatcher wrote: > I think its an unfair generalization to say that ant-dev is "unwilling" to > deal with it.
Historically it is fairly accurate. Go back to december-january archives in 2000-2001, then fastforward a few more months (where it was repeated again) and then fastforward a few months again ... > Perhaps "uninterested" is more accurate. God no. I am VERY VERY VERY interested and have wanted this for ages (about 2 years). The way I would implement it has changed but not the desire to implement it ;) If this had been implemented then we would not even have this flame war on general. (ie maven vs centipede/gump/forrest). The only reason these projects have come into existance is because ant is not providing all the necessary pieces in a build environment. It is too much work to maintain complex build files when you have oodles of very similar products and build processes. > Is there some way > in which we committers have made it more difficult to build the templating > pieces on top? vetoing it? Maybe not you but previous committers have done so and many a flame war have focused on this issue. The required infrastructure has also been vetoed a number of times (think mutable properties, scoping, etc). > I've never seen anyone post any design or patches for integrating any kind > of templating into Ant's core. You haven't been round long enough. I have made proposals on a bunch of different occasions. Everything from making the language dynamic evaluated and constructed (effectively creating functions in ant) to preprocessing (via xslt, velocity) to inline expansion. The only one I haven't proposed for ant1.x is inline expansion as I guess I learnt my lesson when I proposed the two previous mechanisms ;) The recent addition of DynamicTasks makes it possible to bypass many of the limitations but others still remain. -- Cheers, Peter Donald -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
