The keep-alive feature is not quite the same as a fail-on-error on each task, it is more like a fail-on-error for each target.
I have test-driven it in my build env where I have a large number of c++ programs to compile. It is nice to able to change a header file and then compile all the programs again, and use next-error to hop tru all the errors. For the nightly build and for normal use however, I want to fail on the first error. Peter On Tue, 2003-07-08 at 08:41, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On 07 Jul 2003, peter reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I am thinking of committing the keep-alive > > feature: > > > > http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21144 > > > > Do any of the ant commiters have a problem with > > this feature? > > Well, we've already introduced one magic attribute with the > polymorphism patch (will introduce). I'd rather turn the various > failonerror attributes into a single magic fail-on-error, which would > be handled by Task. > > The command line option could then be used to provide a default value > for the new attribute, if it really is necessary. I'm more on Steve's > side that I wouldn't want to keep going no matter where the error > occurs. > > Stefan > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
