Re: [patch] ant in anger
Kev Jackson wrote: Shatzer, Larry wrote: why " to "? '"' is perfectly valid in HTML, and no need to escape it. Sorry, I'm assuming that the docs will be transformed into xml at some point, at that time " may be better than ". you dont need " in XML, except in the special case of 'you want to nest a double quote inside a double quoted attribute". and "so" is 'this' I dont think we should be using it except in that special case. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [patch] ant in anger
Even in XML you do not need to quote it, unless it is in an attribute, and as Peter pointed out, it makes examples harder to understand. I'm for only having " show up where it is needed, in attributes, if necessary. -Original Message- From: Kev Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 7:55 PM To: Ant Developers List Subject: Re: [patch] ant in anger Shatzer, Larry wrote: >why " to "? '"' is perfectly valid in HTML, and no need to escape it. > > Sorry, I'm assuming that the docs will be transformed into xml at some point, at that time " may be better than ". Kev - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [patch] ant in anger
Shatzer, Larry wrote: why " to "? '"' is perfectly valid in HTML, and no need to escape it. Sorry, I'm assuming that the docs will be transformed into xml at some point, at that time " may be better than ". Kev - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [patch] ant in anger
Shatzer, Larry wrote: I have a patch to change all " to " in the html. It is quite large, around 500k,... Should I submit sections of this? Yikes, No, I do not think so. In ant 1.7 (or 1.8) we will be moving to an xml based (maybe (x)docdet assisted) documentation. At that stage there will be a need to convert the html to xml, the quote translation can be done then. Peter - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [patch] ant in anger
> -Original Message- > From: Peter Reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 9:21 AM > To: Ant Developers List > Subject: Re: [patch] ant in anger > > > Shatzer, Larry wrote: > > >why " to "? '"' is perfectly valid in HTML, and no need > to escape it. > > > > > +1 > " makes the html very difficult to read - especially the > examples. > I have a patch to change all " to " in the html. It is quite large, around 500k,... Should I submit sections of this? -- Larry - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [patch] ant in anger
Shatzer, Larry wrote: why " to "? '"' is perfectly valid in HTML, and no need to escape it. +1 " makes the html very difficult to read - especially the examples. http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ant-dev&m=110693846331376&w=2 http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ant-dev&m=106431742007031&w=2 http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ant-dev&m=106431872408214&w=2 We've had this debate in the past. I am fine with either choice, but we should be consistent across the board. -- Larry -Original Message- From: Kev Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 8:26 PM To: Ant Developers List Subject: [patch] ant in anger - fixed broken links - fixed spelling - -> - " -> " &c Kev - 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: [patch] ant in anger
why " to "? '"' is perfectly valid in HTML, and no need to escape it. http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ant-dev&m=110693846331376&w=2 http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ant-dev&m=106431742007031&w=2 http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ant-dev&m=106431872408214&w=2 We've had this debate in the past. I am fine with either choice, but we should be consistent across the board. -- Larry > -Original Message- > From: Kev Jackson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 8:26 PM > To: Ant Developers List > Subject: [patch] ant in anger > > > - fixed broken links > - fixed spelling > - -> > - " -> " > &c > > Kev > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [patch] ant in anger
Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote: Good morning Kev, Good afternoon (just after lunch here :) I'll look at the other docs as I get the time. Fixing typos/broken links is really low-hanging fruit and I can get to a few of these before March 31st, so why not? Kev - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [patch] ant in anger
Good morning Kev, patch submitted, thanks, Antoine Levy-Lambert Kev Jackson wrote: - fixed broken links - fixed spelling - -> - " -> " &c Kev - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[patch] ant in anger
- fixed broken links - fixed spelling - -> - " -> " &c Kev Index: ant_in_anger.html === RCS file: /home/cvspublic/ant/docs/ant_in_anger.html,v retrieving revision 1.17 diff -u -r1.17 ant_in_anger.html --- ant_in_anger.html 5 Mar 2004 10:35:38 - 1.17 +++ ant_in_anger.html 16 Mar 2005 04:24:11 - @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ Steve Loughran -Last updated 2002-11-09 +Last updated 2005-03-16 @@ -22,15 +22,15 @@ http://ant.apache.org/";>Apache Ant - can be an invaluable tool in a team development process -or it can + can be an invaluable tool in a team development process - or it can be yet another source of problems in that ongoing crises we call development . This document contains some strategies and tactics for making the most of Ant. It is moderately frivolous in places, and lacks almost any actual -examples of Ant xml. The lack of examples is entirely deliberate -it +examples of Ant XML. The lack of examples is entirely deliberate - it keeps document maintenance costs down. Most of the concepts covered -don't need the detail about XML representations, as it is processes we -are concerned about, not syntax. Finally, please be aware that the +don't need the detail provided by XML representations, as it is the processes we +are concerned about, not the syntax. Finally, please be aware that the comments here are only suggestions which need to be customised to meet your own needs, not strict rules about what should and should not be done. @@ -44,10 +44,10 @@ Team efforts, usually with the petulant prima-donnas all us Java programmers become once we realise how much in demand we are. - A fairly distributed development team -spread across locations and + A fairly distributed development team - spread across locations and maybe time zones. - Separate sub projects -from separate beans in a big + Separate sub projects - from separate beans in a big enterprise application to separate enterprise applications which need to be vaguely aware of each other. @@ -58,7 +58,6 @@ Everyone is struggling to keep up with platform and tool evolution. Extensive use of external libraries, both open and closed source. - What that all means is that there is no time to spend getting things @@ -74,21 +73,19 @@ Clarify what you want Ant to do - Ant is not a silver bullet. It is just another rusty bullet in the armory of development tools available at your disposal. Its primary purpose is to accelerate the construction and deployment of Java projects. You could certainly extend Ant to do anything Java makes possible: it is easy to imagine writing an image processing task to help in web site deployment by shrinking and recompressing jpeg files, for example. But that would be pushing the boundary of -what Ant is really intended to do -so should be considered with care. - - +what Ant is really intended to do - so should be considered with care. + Ant is also a great adjunct to an IDE; a way of doing all the housekeeping of deployment and for clean, automated builds. But a good modern IDE is a -productivity tool in its own right -one you should consider keeping using. Ant -just lets you give the teams somewhat more freedom in IDE choice -"you can +productivity tool in its own right - one you should continue to use. Ant +just lets you give the teams somewhat more freedom in IDE choice - "you can use whatever you want in development, but Ant for the deployment builds" Now that many modern open source and commercial IDEs include Ant support (including jEdit, Forte, Eclipse and IDEA), @@ -99,18 +96,17 @@ Define standard targets - When you have multiple sub projects, define a standard set of targets. Projects with a split between interface and implementation jar files -could consider impl and intf targets -with separate -debug-impland debug-intf targets for the debug version. +could consider impl and intf targets - with separate +debug-impl and debug-intf targets for the debug version. And of course, the ubiquitous clean target. - + With standard target names, it is easy to build encompassing Ant build files which just hand off the work to the classes below using the -+ant task. For example. the clean target could be handed down to the intf and impl subdirectories from a parent directory @@ -138,31 +134,29 @@ exec and java tasks or inline scripting to extend it. In a -project with many build.xml files, you soon find that having a single +project with many build.xml files, you soon find that having a single central place for implementing the functionality keeps maintenance overhead down. Implementing task extensions through Java code seems extra effort at first, but gives extra benefits:- - Cross platform support can be added later without changing any -build.xml files +build.xml files The code can be submitted to the Ant project itself, for other people to use and main
