Re: 1.6 milestones ?
Jose Alberto is secretly the bastion of declarative programming purity on
this mail list, having a prolog background in the past. So if he thinks the
conditionals (and I'd lump try/catch) in there, then he may have a point.
I myself am mostly happy with conditional targets *and* conditional .
But can see that / does bring something new to the table.
regarding ; I think it needs more publicity and use.
- Original Message -
From: "peter reilly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Ant Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 07:09
Subject: Re: 1.6 milestones ?
The if, foreach, try, and switch tasks are out of ant
for philosophical reasons ("ant is not a scripting language")
The generalized "if"/"unless" for inner elements idea is
used (to great effect) by the cc tasks/datatypes.
Another idea in cc is the use of an extend attribute to
extend datatypes.
Peter
On Friday 14 March 2003 14:54, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> If we are going to take things out of ant-contrib
> then we should take the , , and
> tasks out of ant-contrib and incorporate them into the main line
> with good documentation.
Re: 1.6 milestones ?
- Original Message - From: "Costin Manolache" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 10:02 Subject: RE: 1.6 milestones ? > > I know few people may like the JDK1.4 approach ( "put everything in > rt.jar"), but I think it would be better to have more flexibility. +1. we make the jar too fat and it ties everything to the ant cycles. look how much pressure we are under to get SCM revisions into the 1.5.x drops...if packages were decoupled then it is easy for everything to be on its own schedule. (And harder to have a pure '1.6' revision as a counter-argument).
Re: 1.6 milestones ?
Costin Manolache wrote, On 14/03/2003 19.02: Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote: Thanks Costin. I also understand some of the philosophical arguments (not to become scripting), but when you see how confusing a buildfile looks and how many extra properties you need to add to the build just to avoid using , you undestand that it is really needed. The same argument can be made of the other tasks. I know. I'm using and the other tasks. A lot of build files do a lot of ugly tricks to do ifs without . Maybe a good solution would be to just bundle the ant-contrib tasks with ant. And this is why I still like the idea of Centipede. Shall we remove that moniker and call it ant-distro? Fine with me :-) I think the large number of tasks and the release restrictions are a big problem for ant, and starting with 1.6 we should move to a more componentized approach - i.e. have some sets of tasks that can be released independent of the ant main release. +1 I know few people may like the JDK1.4 approach ( "put everything in rt.jar"), but I think it would be better to have more flexibility. Imagine a core ant, an ant-tasks project, and an ant-distro one. That is, take current Ant, move all the optional tasks in ant-tasks, add to that Ruper and other current Centipede tasks, take Centipede and make that ant-distro. So users that want a full-version take ant distro, those that want to create their distro can take from the core and the tasks. What does this sound like? -- Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] - verba volant, scripta manent - (discussions get forgotten, just code remains) -
RE: 1.6 milestones ?
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
{ http://trelony.cjb.net/ } Alexey N. Solofnenko
Pleasant Hill, CA (GMT-8 usually)
-Original Message-
From: Parimah MehrRostami [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 10:18 AM
To: Ant Developers List
Subject: Re: 1.6 milestones ?
I have requested to be taken out of this mailing list but it does not work..
anyone knows what I need to do? I got in this list by mistake and now my
mail box is flooded with email.. help please - and sorry to send this to
everyone but the unsubscribe email thing does not work!!! any one can fix
that?
- Original Message -
From: "Alexey Solofnenko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Ant Developers List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 10:05 AM
Subject: RE: 1.6 milestones ?
> Is it possible to add expressions in target's if and unless attributes? It
> would reduce the necessity of statements.
>
> - Alexey.
>
> --
> { http://trelony.cjb.net/ } Alexey N. Solofnenko
> Pleasant Hill, CA (GMT-8 usually)
>
>
Re: 1.6 milestones ?
I have requested to be taken out of this mailing list but it does not work..
anyone knows what I need to do? I got in this list by mistake and now my
mail box is flooded with email.. help please - and sorry to send this to
everyone but the unsubscribe email thing does not work!!! any one can fix
that?
- Original Message -
From: "Alexey Solofnenko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Ant Developers List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 10:05 AM
Subject: RE: 1.6 milestones ?
> Is it possible to add expressions in target's if and unless attributes? It
> would reduce the necessity of statements.
>
> - Alexey.
>
> --
> { http://trelony.cjb.net/ } Alexey N. Solofnenko
> Pleasant Hill, CA (GMT-8 usually)
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
RE: 1.6 milestones ?
Is it possible to add expressions in target's if and unless attributes? It
would reduce the necessity of statements.
- Alexey.
--
{ http://trelony.cjb.net/ } Alexey N. Solofnenko
Pleasant Hill, CA (GMT-8 usually)
RE: 1.6 milestones ?
Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> Thanks Costin.
> I also understand some of the philosophical arguments (not to become
> scripting), but when you see how confusing a buildfile looks and how many
> extra properties you need to add to the build just to avoid using ,
> you undestand that it is really needed.
>
> The same argument can be made of the other tasks.
I know. I'm using and the other tasks.
A lot of build files do a lot of ugly tricks to do ifs without .
Maybe a good solution would be to just bundle the ant-contrib tasks with
ant.
I think the large number of tasks and the release restrictions are a big
problem for ant, and starting with 1.6 we should move to a more
componentized approach - i.e. have some sets of tasks that can be released
independent of the ant main release.
I know few people may like the JDK1.4 approach ( "put everything in
rt.jar"), but I think it would be better to have more flexibility.
Costin
>
> Jose Alberto
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Costin Manolache [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: 14 March 2003 15:47
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: 1.6 milestones ?
>>
>>
>> peter reilly wrote:
>>
>> > The if, foreach, try, and switch tasks are out of ant
>> > for philosophical reasons ("ant is not a scripting language")
>>
>> I still share the philosophical reasons, but I wouldn't -1
>> adding them. Many people use it ( I'm using them too ), and
>> it is clearly better to use a clear instead of hacking
>> with the properties.
>>
>> Costin
>>
>>
>> >
>> > The generalized "if"/"unless" for inner elements idea is
>> > used (to great effect) by the cc tasks/datatypes.
>> >
>> > Another idea in cc is the use of an extend attribute to
>> > extend datatypes.
>> >
>> > Peter
>> >
>> > On Friday 14 March 2003 14:54, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
>> >> If we are going to take things out of ant-contrib
>> >> then we should take the , , and
>> >> tasks out of ant-contrib and incorporate them into the main line
>> >> with good documentation.
>> >>
>> >> They have een stable for what (years?) and they are defenitly
>> >> useful, there is no sense on keeping them out of the main
>> line anymore.
>> >>
>> >> By the way, having would eliminate the need to
>> sprinkle more tasks
>> >> with if and unless attributes which just makes everything
>> more confusing.
>> >>
>> >> What it would be nice is to have a way to generalize "if"
>> and "unless"
>> >> attributes in inner elements. So that one can use the
>> pattern we use on
>> >> on other things.
>> >>
>> >> I.E.:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Which would add the or the or both
>> depending on the
>> >> property settings.
>> >>
>> >> I can see all kinds of ways to simplify builds by having
>> something like
>> >> that.
>> >>
>> >> Jose Alberto
>> >>
>> >> > -Original Message-
>> >> > From: peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> > Sent: 14 March 2003 11:32
>> >> > To: Ant Developers List
>> >> > Subject: Re: 1.6 milestones ?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > new features I would like in 1.6.
>> >> >
>> >> > 1) import task to import in-line
>> >> > at the moment, it imports at the end of the build file, thus
>> >> > messing up order for top level defines.
>> >> > 2) ability to have custom conditions - see bugzilla 17199 :-)
>> >> > 3) add if and unless attributes for some tasks
>> >> > e.g. in one can set os = whatever to enable
>> >> > running this task. But normally one would have set a property
>> >> > that would have depended on more conditions than the os.
>> >> >
>> >> > post 1.6
>> >> > 4) move cpptasks from ant-contrib to main-line ant, in
>> the optional
>> >> > tasks area
>> >> >
>> >> > Peter
>> >> >
>> >> > On Thursday 13 March 2003 08:17, Stefan Bodewig wrot
RE: 1.6 milestones ?
Thanks Costin.
I also understand some of the philosophical arguments (not to become
scripting),
but when you see how confusing a buildfile looks and how many extra properties
you need to add to the build just to avoid using , you undestand that it is
really needed.
The same argument can be made of the other tasks.
Jose Alberto
> -Original Message-
> From: Costin Manolache [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 14 March 2003 15:47
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: 1.6 milestones ?
>
>
> peter reilly wrote:
>
> > The if, foreach, try, and switch tasks are out of ant
> > for philosophical reasons ("ant is not a scripting language")
>
> I still share the philosophical reasons, but I wouldn't -1
> adding them. Many people use it ( I'm using them too ), and
> it is clearly better to use a clear instead of hacking
> with the properties.
>
> Costin
>
>
> >
> > The generalized "if"/"unless" for inner elements idea is
> > used (to great effect) by the cc tasks/datatypes.
> >
> > Another idea in cc is the use of an extend attribute to
> > extend datatypes.
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > On Friday 14 March 2003 14:54, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> >> If we are going to take things out of ant-contrib
> >> then we should take the , , and
> >> tasks out of ant-contrib and incorporate them into the main line
> >> with good documentation.
> >>
> >> They have een stable for what (years?) and they are defenitly
> >> useful, there is no sense on keeping them out of the main
> line anymore.
> >>
> >> By the way, having would eliminate the need to
> sprinkle more tasks
> >> with if and unless attributes which just makes everything
> more confusing.
> >>
> >> What it would be nice is to have a way to generalize "if"
> and "unless"
> >> attributes in inner elements. So that one can use the
> pattern we use on
> >> on other things.
> >>
> >> I.E.:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Which would add the or the or both
> depending on the
> >> property settings.
> >>
> >> I can see all kinds of ways to simplify builds by having
> something like
> >> that.
> >>
> >> Jose Alberto
> >>
> >> > -Original Message-
> >> > From: peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> > Sent: 14 March 2003 11:32
> >> > To: Ant Developers List
> >> > Subject: Re: 1.6 milestones ?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > new features I would like in 1.6.
> >> >
> >> > 1) import task to import in-line
> >> > at the moment, it imports at the end of the build file, thus
> >> > messing up order for top level defines.
> >> > 2) ability to have custom conditions - see bugzilla 17199 :-)
> >> > 3) add if and unless attributes for some tasks
> >> > e.g. in one can set os = whatever to enable
> >> > running this task. But normally one would have set a property
> >> > that would have depended on more conditions than the os.
> >> >
> >> > post 1.6
> >> > 4) move cpptasks from ant-contrib to main-line ant, in
> the optional
> >> > tasks area
> >> >
> >> > Peter
> >> >
> >> > On Thursday 13 March 2003 08:17, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> >> > > On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Costin Manolache
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > > > Do we have any plan or idea on when we'll start
> distributing 1.6
> >> > > > milestone builds ?
> >> > >
> >> > > Ant has never released any milestone builds so far, so no,
> >> >
> >> > there is no
> >> >
> >> > > plan yet AFAIK. If there was, you'd know it for sure 8-)
> >> > >
> >> > > Before we release a milestone we should make sure that
> whatever we
> >> > > release at least passes our tests (including the
> currently disabled
> >> > > ImportTest) and doesn't have any known regressions
> (see my mail of
> >> > > yesterday).
> >> > >
> >> > > And then I'd really love to have a rundown of the new
> >> >
> >> > features (I was
> >>
Re: 1.6 milestones ?
peter reilly wrote:
> The if, foreach, try, and switch tasks are out of ant
> for philosophical reasons ("ant is not a scripting language")
I still share the philosophical reasons, but I wouldn't -1
adding them. Many people use it ( I'm using them too ), and
it is clearly better to use a clear instead of hacking
with the properties.
Costin
>
> The generalized "if"/"unless" for inner elements idea is
> used (to great effect) by the cc tasks/datatypes.
>
> Another idea in cc is the use of an extend attribute to
> extend datatypes.
>
> Peter
>
> On Friday 14 March 2003 14:54, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
>> If we are going to take things out of ant-contrib
>> then we should take the , , and
>> tasks out of ant-contrib and incorporate them into the main line
>> with good documentation.
>>
>> They have een stable for what (years?) and they are defenitly
>> useful, there is no sense on keeping them out of the main line anymore.
>>
>> By the way, having would eliminate the need to sprinkle more tasks
>> with if and unless attributes which just makes everything more confusing.
>>
>> What it would be nice is to have a way to generalize "if" and "unless"
>> attributes in inner elements. So that one can use the pattern we use on
>> on other things.
>>
>> I.E.:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Which would add the or the or both depending on the
>> property settings.
>>
>> I can see all kinds of ways to simplify builds by having something like
>> that.
>>
>> Jose Alberto
>>
>> > -Original Message-
>> > From: peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > Sent: 14 March 2003 11:32
>> > To: Ant Developers List
>> > Subject: Re: 1.6 milestones ?
>> >
>> >
>> > new features I would like in 1.6.
>> >
>> > 1) import task to import in-line
>> > at the moment, it imports at the end of the build file, thus
>> > messing up order for top level defines.
>> > 2) ability to have custom conditions - see bugzilla 17199 :-)
>> > 3) add if and unless attributes for some tasks
>> > e.g. in one can set os = whatever to enable
>> > running this task. But normally one would have set a property
>> > that would have depended on more conditions than the os.
>> >
>> > post 1.6
>> > 4) move cpptasks from ant-contrib to main-line ant, in the optional
>> > tasks area
>> >
>> > Peter
>> >
>> > On Thursday 13 March 2003 08:17, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>> > > On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Costin Manolache <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > > > Do we have any plan or idea on when we'll start distributing 1.6
>> > > > milestone builds ?
>> > >
>> > > Ant has never released any milestone builds so far, so no,
>> >
>> > there is no
>> >
>> > > plan yet AFAIK. If there was, you'd know it for sure 8-)
>> > >
>> > > Before we release a milestone we should make sure that whatever we
>> > > release at least passes our tests (including the currently disabled
>> > > ImportTest) and doesn't have any known regressions (see my mail of
>> > > yesterday).
>> > >
>> > > And then I'd really love to have a rundown of the new
>> >
>> > features (I was
>> >
>> > > swamped when you committed the parts coming from the embed proposal
>> > > and lost track of it, a simple short list would suffice for
>> >
>> > starters)
>> >
>> > > and look at them one by one to get consensus on whether we
>> >
>> > want them -
>> >
>> > > if we can't agree on a given feature, it shouldn't be included in a
>> > > milestone at all IMHO.
>> > >
>> > > 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]
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 1.6 milestones ?
The if, foreach, try, and switch tasks are out of ant
for philosophical reasons ("ant is not a scripting language")
The generalized "if"/"unless" for inner elements idea is
used (to great effect) by the cc tasks/datatypes.
Another idea in cc is the use of an extend attribute to
extend datatypes.
Peter
On Friday 14 March 2003 14:54, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> If we are going to take things out of ant-contrib
> then we should take the , , and
> tasks out of ant-contrib and incorporate them into the main line
> with good documentation.
>
> They have een stable for what (years?) and they are defenitly
> useful, there is no sense on keeping them out of the main line anymore.
>
> By the way, having would eliminate the need to sprinkle more tasks
> with if and unless attributes which just makes everything more confusing.
>
> What it would be nice is to have a way to generalize "if" and "unless"
> attributes in inner elements. So that one can use the pattern we use on
> on other things.
>
> I.E.:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Which would add the or the or both depending on the
> property settings.
>
> I can see all kinds of ways to simplify builds by having something like
> that.
>
> Jose Alberto
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: 14 March 2003 11:32
> > To: Ant Developers List
> > Subject: Re: 1.6 milestones ?
> >
> >
> > new features I would like in 1.6.
> >
> > 1) import task to import in-line
> > at the moment, it imports at the end of the build file, thus
> > messing up order for top level defines.
> > 2) ability to have custom conditions - see bugzilla 17199 :-)
> > 3) add if and unless attributes for some tasks
> > e.g. in one can set os = whatever to enable
> > running this task. But normally one would have set a property
> > that would have depended on more conditions than the os.
> >
> > post 1.6
> > 4) move cpptasks from ant-contrib to main-line ant, in the optional
> > tasks area
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > On Thursday 13 March 2003 08:17, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> > > On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Costin Manolache <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Do we have any plan or idea on when we'll start distributing 1.6
> > > > milestone builds ?
> > >
> > > Ant has never released any milestone builds so far, so no,
> >
> > there is no
> >
> > > plan yet AFAIK. If there was, you'd know it for sure 8-)
> > >
> > > Before we release a milestone we should make sure that whatever we
> > > release at least passes our tests (including the currently disabled
> > > ImportTest) and doesn't have any known regressions (see my mail of
> > > yesterday).
> > >
> > > And then I'd really love to have a rundown of the new
> >
> > features (I was
> >
> > > swamped when you committed the parts coming from the embed proposal
> > > and lost track of it, a simple short list would suffice for
> >
> > starters)
> >
> > > and look at them one by one to get consensus on whether we
> >
> > want them -
> >
> > > if we can't agree on a given feature, it shouldn't be included in a
> > > milestone at all IMHO.
> > >
> > > 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]
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: 1.6 milestones ?
If we are going to take things out of ant-contrib then we should take the , , and tasks out of ant-contrib and incorporate them into the main line with good documentation. They have een stable for what (years?) and they are defenitly useful, there is no sense on keeping them out of the main line anymore. By the way, having would eliminate the need to sprinkle more tasks with if and unless attributes which just makes everything more confusing. What it would be nice is to have a way to generalize "if" and "unless" attributes in inner elements. So that one can use the pattern we use on on other things. I.E.: Which would add the or the or both depending on the property settings. I can see all kinds of ways to simplify builds by having something like that. Jose Alberto > -Original Message- > From: peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 14 March 2003 11:32 > To: Ant Developers List > Subject: Re: 1.6 milestones ? > > > new features I would like in 1.6. > > 1) import task to import in-line > at the moment, it imports at the end of the build file, thus > messing up order for top level defines. > 2) ability to have custom conditions - see bugzilla 17199 :-) > 3) add if and unless attributes for some tasks > e.g. in one can set os = whatever to enable > running this task. But normally one would have set a property > that would have depended on more conditions than the os. > > post 1.6 > 4) move cpptasks from ant-contrib to main-line ant, in the optional > tasks area > > Peter > > On Thursday 13 March 2003 08:17, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > > On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Costin Manolache <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Do we have any plan or idea on when we'll start distributing 1.6 > > > milestone builds ? > > > > Ant has never released any milestone builds so far, so no, > there is no > > plan yet AFAIK. If there was, you'd know it for sure 8-) > > > > Before we release a milestone we should make sure that whatever we > > release at least passes our tests (including the currently disabled > > ImportTest) and doesn't have any known regressions (see my mail of > > yesterday). > > > > And then I'd really love to have a rundown of the new > features (I was > > swamped when you committed the parts coming from the embed proposal > > and lost track of it, a simple short list would suffice for > starters) > > and look at them one by one to get consensus on whether we > want them - > > if we can't agree on a given feature, it shouldn't be included in a > > milestone at all IMHO. > > > > 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] > >
Re: 1.6 milestones ?
new features I would like in 1.6. 1) import task to import in-line at the moment, it imports at the end of the build file, thus messing up order for top level defines. 2) ability to have custom conditions - see bugzilla 17199 :-) 3) add if and unless attributes for some tasks e.g. in one can set os = whatever to enable running this task. But normally one would have set a property that would have depended on more conditions than the os. post 1.6 4) move cpptasks from ant-contrib to main-line ant, in the optional tasks area Peter On Thursday 13 March 2003 08:17, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Costin Manolache <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Do we have any plan or idea on when we'll start distributing 1.6 > > milestone builds ? > > Ant has never released any milestone builds so far, so no, there is no > plan yet AFAIK. If there was, you'd know it for sure 8-) > > Before we release a milestone we should make sure that whatever we > release at least passes our tests (including the currently disabled > ImportTest) and doesn't have any known regressions (see my mail of > yesterday). > > And then I'd really love to have a rundown of the new features (I was > swamped when you committed the parts coming from the embed proposal > and lost track of it, a simple short list would suffice for starters) > and look at them one by one to get consensus on whether we want them - > if we can't agree on a given feature, it shouldn't be included in a > milestone at all IMHO. > > Stefan > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 1.6 milestones ?
On Thu, 13 Mar 2003 06:29 pm, Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote: > What about releasing an ant 1.5.4 before 1.6 with the current head revision > in it, plus as many bugs from bugzilla as possible ? A rose by any other name. If we release the HEAD revision, we'll call it 1.6 > This would help a number of people and be encouraging for all the ant users > who have reported bugs or suggested patches in bugzilla. > Plus this would bring the task to a confrontation with users ? I > know from reading ant-users and ant-dev that this a feature that many > people need. > Meanwhile, it should be possible to make a discussion on the antlib feature > or new taskdef, and on the boot loader process for ant on Win 9x. I have some ideas on the boot loader as I've done somethign similar before. -- Conor MacNeill Blog: http://codefeed.com/blog/
Re: 1.6 milestones ?
On Thu, 13 Mar 2003 12:02 pm, Costin Manolache wrote: > Steve Loughran wrote: > > That's the task that doesnt have any documentation, right? > > > :-) > > It'll have documentation after it is reviewed by more people and we > know it's going to be stable. > I think more people will be able to try it out if they know about it and it is documented. We can update the document when we update the code :-) An entry in WHATSNEW would also be a good idea. -- Conor MacNeill Blog: http://codefeed.com/blog/
Re: 1.6 milestones ?
On Thu, 13 Mar 2003 09:50 am, Costin Manolache wrote: > Hi, > > Do we have any plan or idea on when we'll start distributing 1.6 milestone > builds ? > I'm not really sure what a milestone build means and, more importantly, what expectations it creates for stability of feature set. For 1.6 I think there a few things which have been started which have not been completed. 1. Have we settled on the interpretation of basedir in the imported fragments? 2. I have a test case which fails which I think should be addressed. It is currently disabled since it was blocking the reporting of the JSPC failures 3. A lot of the code has comments such as //EXPERIMENTAL. There is unused code. I think some review here would be good. I'm still nervous about the task and its ability to change the config of a running loader. I would like to close off the 1.5 branch beore we really start to polish 1.6. 1.5.2 was meant to do that but I think we may have rushed it a little. -- Conor MacNeill Blog: http://codefeed.com/blog/
Re: 1.6 milestones ?
On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Costin Manolache <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Do we have any plan or idea on when we'll start distributing 1.6 > milestone builds ? Ant has never released any milestone builds so far, so no, there is no plan yet AFAIK. If there was, you'd know it for sure 8-) Before we release a milestone we should make sure that whatever we release at least passes our tests (including the currently disabled ImportTest) and doesn't have any known regressions (see my mail of yesterday). And then I'd really love to have a rundown of the new features (I was swamped when you committed the parts coming from the embed proposal and lost track of it, a simple short list would suffice for starters) and look at them one by one to get consensus on whether we want them - if we can't agree on a given feature, it shouldn't be included in a milestone at all IMHO. Stefan
Re: 1.6 milestones ?
Steve Loughran wrote, On 13/03/2003 0.39: ... That's the task that doesnt have any documentation, right? Jikes, you're right. How do I submit it, as the usual HTML page or the @tags... I'm a bit behind the Ant documentation efforts, sorry. Maybe the thing to do is look at what major changes still need to go in to ant. Now that we have exploded optional.jar, we need to compensate by perhaps adding a boot loader process for running ant, so that win9x boxes dont run out of memory. I keep getting "line too long" when I involke ant, because the script creates a too long classpath... I'd like to fix this ASAP, any suggestions? Shall I simply load in Ant all the jars in the ./lib dir? We also need to rework the documentation. In what sense? The other feature I thought was on the cards was some kind of plugin mechanism that pulls in new jars better -presumably a manifest, and the appropriate extensions to to handle them. Can you please expand a bit more? As I read, it looks like ... for a more enhanced feature, we have the "cents", but I'd move this discussion-integration-whatever to after 1.6. I think together these would be core features that need to be up and running before we can worry about milestone releases. -- Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] - verba volant, scripta manent - (discussions get forgotten, just code remains) -
Re: 1.6 milestones ?
On Wed, 12 Mar 2003, Costin Manolache <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It'll have documentation after it is reviewed by more people and we > know it's going to be stable. I don't like this approach at all. How are you expecting user feedback on an undocumented feature? Stefan
Re: 1.6 milestones ?
What about releasing an ant 1.5.4 before 1.6 with the current head revision in it, plus as many bugs from bugzilla as possible ? This would help a number of people and be encouraging for all the ant users who have reported bugs or suggested patches in bugzilla. Plus this would bring the task to a confrontation with users ? I know from reading ant-users and ant-dev that this a feature that many people need. Meanwhile, it should be possible to make a discussion on the antlib feature or new taskdef, and on the boot loader process for ant on Win 9x. Antoine
Re: 1.6 milestones ?
Steve Loughran wrote: > That's the task that doesnt have any documentation, right? :-) It'll have documentation after it is reviewed by more people and we know it's going to be stable. > Maybe the thing to do is look at what major changes still need to go in to > ant. Now that we have exploded optional.jar, we need to compensate by > perhaps adding a boot loader process for running ant, so that win9x boxes > dont run out of memory. We also need to rework the documentation. > > The other feature I thought was on the cards was some kind of plugin > mechanism that pulls in new jars better -presumably a manifest, and the > appropriate extensions to to handle them. > > I think together these would be core features that need to be up and > running before we can worry about milestone releases. The point of a milestone release is to get feedback on the new features. Many people are not comfortable building ant HEAD from sources. Costin
Re: 1.6 milestones ?
- Original Message - From: "Costin Manolache" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 14:50 Subject: 1.6 milestones ? > Hi, > > Do we have any plan or idea on when we'll start distributing 1.6 milestone > builds ? > > Tomcat5 is getting stable, and the next milestone will probably include an > "embeded" profile that will be controlled by ant and jmx tasks. It would > really help to have a matching ant1.6M1 instead of requiring a head build. > > I can't volunteer as release manager - and I don't want to push anyone > or anything, just want to get an idea about what to expect, so I either > remove deps on 1.6 or move ahead. Right now I'm only using , > but I'll probably use import ( and I would use 1.6 for the improvements in > startup time ) That's the task that doesnt have any documentation, right? Maybe the thing to do is look at what major changes still need to go in to ant. Now that we have exploded optional.jar, we need to compensate by perhaps adding a boot loader process for running ant, so that win9x boxes dont run out of memory. We also need to rework the documentation. The other feature I thought was on the cards was some kind of plugin mechanism that pulls in new jars better -presumably a manifest, and the appropriate extensions to to handle them. I think together these would be core features that need to be up and running before we can worry about milestone releases.
