On Fri, 25 Apr 2003, Costin Manolache <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - we can restrict the set of elements under antlib to taskdef,
> typdef or role ( after role is added to ant ), or we can allow more
looks important as well.
Stefan
t tasks, to use your
example).
If it had been available at the time, do you think anyone would have
thought that requiring a subset of JSTL-only syntax in web.xml was a good
idea? To my mind, that is somewhat equivalent to what you are proposing.
If this is the case
- then using ant synta
So we add this then. I am not closed to progress and change but let start small.
Jose Alberto
> -Original Message-
> From: Costin Manolache [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 25 April 2003 20:10
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Antlib descriptor
>
>
> Jose
Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> I am not too keen on having alive ANTS roaming in my classpath.
>
> Jar files are passive things, in general having too many in your
> classpath does not mean you will execute more stuff. I think that is nice
> and autoinitializing jars (antlibs) sound way too scar
that means all those UnknownElement blah blah blah and cruft
that is needed for projects but I do not see why would be needed here.
If we are talking about a parser that uses introspection to fill-up
the datastructure representing the antlib descriptor, then I have no
problem on that. For new chang
> From: Erik Hatcher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > - maybe we want antlibs to have some initialization. This can be
> > easily done
> > by allowing more ant elements in the descriptor
> > - maybe we'll want to allow antlib to declare targets -
> that could be
> > used
> > in depends or antcal
Erik Hatcher wrote:
>> - maybe we want antlibs to have some initialization. This can be
>> easily done
>> by allowing more ant elements in the descriptor
>> - maybe we'll want to allow antlib to declare targets - that could be
>> used
>> in depends or antcall ( > depends="myAntLib:antlibTarget"/>
er it more and see what
others say about it.
Erik and few others seem to believe that the XML vocabulary doesn't
matter,
and anything can be generated by xdoclet and processed. If this is the
case
- then using ant syntax in the antlib descriptor would be as good as
another syntax.
Well, again
lieve that the XML vocabulary doesn't matter,
and anything can be generated by xdoclet and processed. If this is the case
- then using ant syntax in the antlib descriptor would be as good as
another syntax.
I'm not saying that ant XML processing is perfect. It can be argued that a
mor
