Dominique --
Dang, I didn't know there was a competition going on!
I wrote most of the Antelope tasks because I had a specific need. Feel
free to grab what you want and put it in Ant-contrib. I like your
loophole for your antreturn task, I didn't like the code reuse
either, but the way the ant
22, 2003 12:28 PM
Subject: [VOTE] Ant/Antcall Returning properties and references [WAS] Re:
ant 1.5.4 : Import
I think that the code of Dominique would add a lot of value to ant.
Instead of committing the code as is, I would like simply to add the new
features to the ant/ task.
This means
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Antoine Levy-Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
So far, I have got two +1 (myself and Jan Materne) for this
proposal.
Just a quick comment from myself.
I don't really like the idea of turning ant into a method call,
that's why I won't give you a positive vote - unless I can
-Original Message-
From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'd like to explore the needs that is driving this specific feature
request - and see whether there is a different way to meet it.
import or include will allow you to import a set of properties (or
property setting
Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote:
So far, I have got two +1 (myself and Jan Materne) for this proposal. The
vote will be closed tomorrow at 12:28 pm CET (20 hours from now). Three +1s
are required for a code change, so, by the likes of it, the vote will have a
negative result.
The antfetch/,
From: Steve Loughran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote:
So far, I have got two +1 (myself and Jan Materne) for this
proposal.
The vote will be closed tomorrow at 12:28 pm CET (20 hours
from now).
Three +1s are required for a code change, so, by the likes
of
english. :)
- Message d'origine -
De : Antoine Levy-Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
À : Ant Developers List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Envoyé : jeudi 28 août 2003 16:37
Objet : Re: [VOTE] Ant/Antcall Returning properties and
references [WAS] Re: ant 1.5.4 : Import
So far, I have got two +1 (myself and Jan
with my +1
Cheers,
Antoine
- Original Message -
From: Dominique Devienne [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Ant Developers List' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 5:36 PM
Subject: RE: ant 1.5.4 : Import
Then have a look at what I did in the past two days to do something
similar
;-) I
Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote, On 31/07/2003 13.24:
From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
Wait a second, does this mean that there is crosstalk between the
lines 1, 2, 3?
Yes, there is crosstalk and at least in XSLT this is a good thing.
It means that
Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote, On 31/07/2003 13.24:
From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
Wait a second, does this mean that there is crosstalk between
the lines
1, 2, 3?
Yes, there is crosstalk and at least in XSLT this is a good thing.
It means that you can write a bunch of
I am willing to start changing import based on the email of Conor of July
29th, 2003.
I am of course more than happy if other committers want to participate in
the exercise.
In fact I would like to rename import as include to reinforce the fact
that this is its primary function. In fact the
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 10:38 pm, Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote:
I am willing to start changing import based on the email of Conor of July
29th, 2003.
I am of course more than happy if other committers want to participate in
the exercise.
Cool. I think things are in flux for a few days more,
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 10:38 pm, Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote:
I am willing to start changing import based on the email of Conor of
July
29th, 2003.
I am of course more than happy if other committers want to participate
in
the exercise.
Cool. I think things are in flux for a few days
Conor MacNeill wrote, On 30/07/2003 0.10:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 05:52 pm, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Personally, I don't see the real need for it, as the same can be done
with correctly-written @importable files. In the specific, init values
should be included rather than imported.
Can you point me
-Original Message-
From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2003 3:46 AM
OTOMH this could be solved by rewriting all dependencies that
are not in
the import line.
(1)---a
multi-import (2)---b
(3)---c---d
Would not it be easier to explicitly specify basedir for every include.
It works for me.
- Alexey.
--
{ http://trelony.cjb.net/ } Alexey N. Solofnenko
Pleasant Hill, CA (GMT-8 usually)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL
it is much more easy
to handle
and if XSLTs do not need more that this, I do not see why ANT will need much
more.
Cheers,
Jose Alberto
-Original Message-
From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 30 July 2003 09:46
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ant 1.5.4 : Import
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 05:15 am, Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote:
Now we need someone (Conor ?) to decide in which order these different
points are going to be added to our code.
(Like what is happening for antlib).
No, we all get to decide :-). I have but one vote.
Conor
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 04:18 am, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
I agree that ${basedir} should be the value of basedir for the main
buildfile being executed. But what I think is necessary is to have
access to the basedirs of the imported file in a systematic, deterministic
and conflict free way. I
Conor MacNeill wrote, On 29/07/2003 1.23:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 04:18 am, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
I agree that ${basedir} should be the value of basedir for the main
buildfile being executed. But what I think is necessary is to have
access to the basedirs of the imported file in a systematic,
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 04:56 pm, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
I think this is all getting too complex for import. What you are
describing is project composition where each project maintains its own
context, its own basedir, etc.
AFAIK this is done with ant
Not quite the same. projectref
Conor MacNeill wrote, On 29/07/2003 9.15:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 04:56 pm, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
I think this is all getting too complex for import. What you are
describing is project composition where each project maintains its own
context, its own basedir, etc.
AFAIK this is done with ant
From: Conor MacNeill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I think this is all getting too complex for import. What
you are describing
is project composition where each project maintains its own
context, its own
basedir, etc. This can be done separately from import. We
have discussed
this in
If you want to simplify things, why not go even further?
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, Conor MacNeill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
1. import with optional name. The name is to be used in the renaming
of targets.
I'd like to think about removing target renaming completely. What
exactly is the use-case for
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003, Antoine Levy-Lambert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
href should also support URLs But as DD pointed out, this is opening
a pandora box. If imported files are downloaded from an http server
or from a jar file, there will be problems with properties, ...
I don't think I've
Stefan Bodewig wrote, On 29/07/2003 12.59:
If you want to simplify things, why not go even further?
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, Conor MacNeill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
1. import with optional name. The name is to be used in the renaming
of targets.
I'd like to think about removing target renaming
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thought I had already answered this?
quite possible.
Anyway, the need is that I have to be able to override a target I
import.
I don't think I like either the idea of of what you describe nor the
implementation. I'd
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 05:52 pm, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
Personally, I don't see the real need for it, as the same can be done
with correctly-written @importable files. In the specific, init values
should be included rather than imported.
Can you point me to some relevant use-cases?
Ok,
I would like to summarize a number of ideas I have read concerning import.
1) attributes for the import task itself :
-
11) file
import file=a/b/common.xml/
=== import relative to the basedir of importing build file
12) href
(Peter Reilly)
import
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Conor MacNeill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Sure. Let me push the C/C++ analogy a little further.
Leaving this analogy aside ...
In the particular case you've mentioned (checkstyle.xml using
build.xml) I'm absolutely with Ken, farm out the common stuff and
import it from both.
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Conor MacNeill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
+1 on capability to restrict a build file to only be imported
-1 to make that mandatory for imports
fine with me.
+0 to an attribute in project to designate such files
+1 to a new root element instead.
The attribute would enable
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 12:19 am, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Conor MacNeill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If A imports B and B imports C, how
does B address C if all relative paths depend on A's basedir, that B
cannot even pretend to know about?
The paths won't depend on A's basedir. They
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 12:19 am, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Conor MacNeill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Sure. Let me push the C/C++ analogy a little further.
Leaving this analogy aside ...
In the particular case you've mentioned (checkstyle.xml using
build.xml) I'm absolutely
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003, Conor MacNeill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Clear as mud?
Errm, yes.
How would you do
taskdef resource=...
classpath
fileset dir=lib/ includes=*.jar/
/classpath
/taskdef
??
By not using relative paths (but something like ${this.basedir}/lib),
I guess.
Stefan
, not in the main build
file.
- Alexey.
--
{ http://trelony.cjb.net/ } Alexey N. Solofnenko
Pleasant Hill, CA (GMT-8 usually)
-Original Message-
From: Conor MacNeill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 8:39 AM
To: Ant Developers List
Subject: Re: ant 1.5.4 : Import
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 12:52 am, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003, Conor MacNeill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Clear as mud?
Errm, yes.
How would you do
taskdef resource=...
classpath
fileset dir=lib/ includes=*.jar/
/classpath
/taskdef
??
By not using relative paths
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003, Conor MacNeill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Currently you get a property telling you the location of your build
file - not your basedir.
You could use dirname/ on it, but having it as a separate property
would be convenient.
BTW, the property is based on the project's name
Conor MacNeill wrote, On 25/07/2003 17.19:
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 12:52 am, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003, Conor MacNeill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Clear as mud?
Errm, yes.
How would you do
taskdef resource=...
classpath
fileset dir=lib/ includes=*.jar/
/classpath
/taskdef
??
By not
basedir inside this files.
Jose Alberto
-Original Message-
From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 25 July 2003 15:20
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ant 1.5.4 : Import
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Conor MacNeill [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Sure. Let me push the C/C
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 01:16 am, peter reilly wrote:
On Fri, 2003-07-25 at 15:51, Conor MacNeill wrote:
Or a pint of guinness ;-)
Good idea. :-)
Conor
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands,
Conor MacNeill wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 01:50 am, Dominique Devienne wrote:
Getting back to your point, where does that leaves us for basedir?
I've slept on it :-). I'd vote to go with the current behaviour. i.e. ignore
basedir. Import tasks will always import relative to the file containing
On Thu, 2003-07-24 at 03:59, Conor MacNeill wrote:
At the moment I have issues with import. The importing within imports is
not
right, at the moment, I think. Also I think we need to give antlib a bit of
a stretch :-) I'd like to see that happen first. For me a first 1.6 beta is
still
On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 07:19 pm, peter reilly wrote:
What are the issues with import.
I think we should write them down and deal with
them - it cannot be that difficult..
The difficult ones (manipulation of basebir etc)
we should explicitly defer to ant 1.6.
Not difficult but the issues are
Conor MacNeill wrote, On 24/07/2003 13.36:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 07:19 pm, peter reilly wrote:
What are the issues with import.
I think we should write them down and deal with
them - it cannot be that difficult..
The difficult ones (manipulation of basebir etc)
we should explicitly defer to ant
On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 10:26 pm, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
What about:
import file=blah.xml name=blah/
Sure - pretty much what I thought, maybe a more descriptive attribute name
(overrideprefix). It would default to the imported project name.
So IIUC it's really only about making the
Conor MacNeill wrote, On 24/07/2003 14.49:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 10:26 pm, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
What about:
import file=blah.xml name=blah/
Sure - pretty much what I thought, maybe a more descriptive attribute name
(overrideprefix). It would default to the imported project name.
A bit long...
On Thu, 2003-07-24 at 13:49, Conor MacNeill wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 10:26 pm, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote:
What about:
import file=blah.xml name=blah/
Sure - pretty much what I thought, maybe a more descriptive attribute name
(overrideprefix). It would default to the imported
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 12:49 am, peter reilly wrote:
So the question is what should B's import be relative to:
1) A.xml's basedir
2) B.xml
3) B.xml's currently ignored basedir attribute.
I think that the consensus is 3).
+1
Conor
: Thursday, July 24, 2003 9:49 AM
To: Ant Developers List
Subject: Re: ant 1.5.4 : Import
So the question is what should B's import be relative to:
1) A.xml's basedir
2) B.xml
3) B.xml's currently ignored basedir attribute.
I think that the consensus is 3).
Peter
On 24 Jul 2003, peter reilly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So the question is what should B's import be relative to:
1) A.xml's basedir
2) B.xml
3) B.xml's currently ignored basedir attribute.
I think that the consensus is 3).
I'm not sure, I'm more along the lines of (3) if B has a
Dominique Devienne wrote, On 24/07/2003 16.55:
...
In other words, the context of execution of any imported file should be the
top level build file. I foresee no end in the confusion that would result
otherwise.
Some might argue that an imported file should be able to know where if was
imported
I'm interested to hear about use bases that would refute my argument on the
other hand, to see what I missed. Thanks, --DD
Say I have build B importing C and I'm using B quite happily.
Then one day, I create A to import B and the import in B of C no longer works
because B had a basedir
is own directory.
Finding names is always difficult, but an 'importdir' attribute doesn't
sound too bad. --DD
-Original Message-
From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 10:09 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ant 1.5.4 : Import
, 2003 10:23 AM
To: Ant Developers List
Subject: Re: ant 1.5.4 : Import
I'm interested to hear about use bases that would refute my argument on
the
other hand, to see what I missed. Thanks, --DD
Say I have build B importing C and I'm using B quite happily.
Then one day, I create
Did my other messages answer your questions??? --DD
-Original Message-
From: Nicola Ken Barozzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 10:09 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ant 1.5.4 : Import
Dominique Devienne wrote, On 24/07/2003 16.55:
...
In other
Dominique Devienne wrote, On 24/07/2003 17.23:
Did my other messages answer your questions??? --DD
IIUC we agree.
--
Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- verba volant, scripta manent -
(discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 01:23 am, Dominique Devienne wrote:
I (strongly again ;) believe that imported build files should be designed
to be imported, and never used without being imported.
I disagree (strongly :-). I think augmenting/overriding an existing build file
is a valid use for import. I
Dominique Devienne wrote, On 24/07/2003 17.18:
This is indeed a valid use of knowledge of where an imported file was
imported from.
I still think (strongly) that the basedir of any imported file should be
ignored (with a warning if it's something else than ., the default), and
always use the one
-Original Message-
From: Conor MacNeill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 10:39 AM
To: Ant Developers List
Subject: Re: ant 1.5.4 : Import
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 01:23 am, Dominique Devienne wrote:
I (strongly again ;) believe that imported build files should
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 01:36 am, Dominique Devienne wrote:
Then have a look at what I did in the past two days to do something similar
;-) I created an antreturn task that piggybacks on ant, and allows
returning properties and/or references from the called build file back into
the caller's
-Original Message-
From: Conor MacNeill [ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 10:39 AM
To: Ant Developers List
Subject: Re: ant 1.5.4 : Import
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 01:23 am, Dominique Devienne wrote:
I (strongly again ;) believe that imported
about, but maybe they could be ON
only if explicitly requested??? Dual behavior is not good, but neither is
tricky behavior... --DD
-Original Message-
From: Conor MacNeill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2003 10:53 AM
To: Ant Developers List
Subject: Re: ant 1.5.4
62 matches
Mail list logo
