I thought you wouldn't like this part.... "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote : | Your solution would reproduce the old behaviour. |
I see your point regarding the incremental build. Shouldn't I be able to replicate the functionality of the existing system/build.xml using uptodate? Or at the very worst, set unjar.overwrite=false? "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote : | However, I'd prefer it if it where a bit more transparent, rather than | having to declare an artifical artifact. | I'm confused by what you mean by artificial artifact? Are you referring to the source-artifact element? I don't think this is artificial -- the jar is an input that needs to be treated in a special way, much like a resource. I like the natural syntax of what you propose, but it is unclear to me where/when the unjarring takes place. Wouldn't it need to be done in some temporary space so that the element could be expanded to include it? Would the Source class have this responsibility? I apologize for the questions, but I went down a path (potentially the wrong one) and you are pointing in the opposite direction :-) View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3867682#3867682 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3867682 ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ JBoss-Development mailing list JBoss-Development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
