DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18391>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18391 RFE : ignoreMissingBuildFiles option for subant [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|RFE: ignoreMissingBuildFiles|RFE : |option for subant |ignoreMissingBuildFiles | |option for subant ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2003-04-11 17:42 ------- Maybe selecting by directories isn't what we want then? If one can specify directories, then the build breaks if someone adds a directory that becomes included without also adding a working build file, or adds an exclude to the build to handle the new directory. This brittleness may be desireable, but if it is discovered accidentally, right now the only fix is to recode the build file with a fileset that selects specific buildfile names (making the antfile atribute useless). With this patch adding the ignoreMissingBuildFiles atribute fixes the problem with no further rethinking of the logic. My concern is for people who do just what I did and assume that the way to use subant is to tell it a antfile name and feed it directories. (why else would the antfile atribute be there?) This logic leads one down the brittle path first. If nothing else, I think this issue might be good to mention in whatever manual docs or xdocs are provided for subant in the future. I suppose it could be that I stumbled into this minor hole simply because I think in wierd ways...
