On 18 Jul 2002, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I think you put the problem in the wrong way - having tasks outside > > of a task ( i.e. at top level ) is the real issue. > > No I don't. > > Peter is +1 on allowing tasks outside of targets but -1 on allowing a > build file without targets.
You mean: <project > <javac ... /> <target /> </project> I.e. we require a <target/> just for the sake of having it ? Because if we allow top level tasks you can have everything at top level. Well, if there are good reasons for requiring every project to have at least an empty target, maybe we can make sure the target doesn't require a name, and we'll have to document that everyone who is using a toplevel will have to include "<target/>" at the end. If Peter wants a name as well, users will have to type "<target name="do_nothing_for_the_sake_of_Peter" />". Ugly, but it doesn't change too much - you get what you want and we keep Peter happy. Costin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
