Peter Donald wrote:
>
> On Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:31, Charles Benett wrote:
> > Here's a thought: can we get rid of all the build.sh/build.bat and
> > ant.jar etc?
>
> nice idea but not yet good in practice I don't think. Anything that requires
> me to do more than
>
> cvs co myproject
> cd myproject
> ./build.sh
>
> is too much IMHO :)
on the other hand, for a one-off investment in installing ant you can
save 7 characters by going 'ant' rather than './build.sh' :-)
More seriously, we get rid of two jars (ant and optional) and a bunch of
scripts.
And, for my money, its a lot easier to work out what's happening without
chains of scripts to follow.
>
> > Here's why: as currently written, I think, if you already have ANT_HOME
> > defined then the build script won't use jakarta-avalon/tools/lib and so
> > will miss optional.jar. (Which makes the junit task fail in excalibur).
> >
> > Either we can make the scripts more complicated to check for junit in a
> > pre-existing ANT_HOME or we can simply tell people that they need to
> > download and install ant with junit. Then we can remove the build
> > scripts and execute the buildfile by invoking 'ant' directly.
>
> alternatively we can go
>
> unset ANT_HOME
>
> in each script?
save-unset-reset?
I'd still prefer not to include ant.
Charles
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
