--- Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > assuming my concern that users wouldn't bother
> using
> > something that requires extra setup (per
> project!),
> > what other things could we do to increase
> > ease-of-setup for antlibs?
>
> What's difficult already?
> It's like a Java import basically.
> You declare what you're using. What's wrong with
> that? --DD
hmm... using the project attributes:
<project name="foo" default="bar"
xmlns:fs="antlib:org.apache.tools.ant.types.selectors"
xmlns:rs="antlib:org.apache.tools.ant.types.resources.selectors"
xmlns:ac="antlib:net.sf.antcontrib">
It's just the package names are quite long. Could we
auto-alias the uris so that the user setup might be
like
<project name="foo" default="bar"
xmlns:fs="ant.fileselectors"
xmlns:rs="ant.resourceselectors">
?
same thing for using the other URI approaches...
-Matt
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
