Ian,
Thanks,
Gius_.
> Gius,
> Hmm - well it previously wasn't correct - NAnt would give an error if
> you tried to re-define a fileset. I've just made the changes so that you
> can now re-define any datatype refererence. Same behaviour as properties.
>
> Ian
>
> Giuseppe Greco wrote:
>
>>Hi All,
Gius,
Hmm - well it previously wasn't correct - NAnt would give an error if
you tried to re-define a fileset. I've just made the changes so that you
can now re-define any datatype refererence. Same behaviour as properties.
Ian
Giuseppe Greco wrote:
Hi All,
Hi Ian,
What have you decided about f
Hi All,
Hi Ian,
What have you decided about filesets redefinition?
Is semantically still correct that NAnt complies
when redefining existing s?
Gius_.
--
Giuseppe Greco
::agamura::
phone: +41 (0)91 604 67 65
mobile: +41 (0)76 390 60 32
email: [EMAIL P
I think I see it. The grey shaded bit is the 1st level inline docs you
mentioned. Looking thru some of the generated doc I'm thinking that just
having links to the nested element doc will be better than having it
inline. In the compiler tasks for example there are 3 instances of
fileset - sourc
A small question - required attributes in red text ? This is a bad idea.
Red makes it look like these attributes should be avoided - 'Warning'
also it seems the stying is a bit wacky. Should those nested element
sections be shaded in grey ?
and what is the 2nd paramaters table for ? did that get
