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
(Boy, you fall behind a couple of days on your email and suddenly an
avalanche breaks loose)
At 10:39 AM 4/25/2003 -0700, Costin Manolache wrote:
However I'm more convinced than ever that the XML should use a subset of
ant, and reuse the same processing infrastructure. I.e. not another parser
or
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
> From: Costin Manolache [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Erik Hatcher wrote:
>
>
> What I'm trying to say is that a lot of things we might want
> later will
> be simpler, and we won't have to bloat the antlib SAX
> processor to implement
> such features.
>
> I'm sure there are some valid uses
> 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"/>
On Friday, April 25, 2003, at 01:39 PM, Costin Manolache wrote:
New thread.
+1 :)
However I'm more convinced than ever that the XML should use a subset
of
ant, and reuse the same processing infrastructure. I.e. not another
parser
or rules.
I'll defer commenting on this until I ponder it more and
