Agree. Ara.
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:xdoclet-devel- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Hani Suleiman > Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 1:32 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Xdoclet-devel] RE: [Xdoclet-user] Xdoclet cvs issues > > I'd actually argue for this being the default method of operation, and the > fallback being to try and locate the jars the way it is currently done. > > Reasoning: people have to change their build.xml anyways to include in the > new bootstrap task, so adding an extra dir parameter will be very > easy/intuitive, whereas adding a new shell script is less trivial and IMHO > is a HUGE change in the way one expects ant to work. > > On 29/4/02 6:33 pm, "Ara Abrahamian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > +1 but we should provide a default anyway, casual user should not have > > to always specify it, but can override it. > > > > Ara. > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:xdoclet-devel- > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Aslak Helles�y > >> Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 5:08 PM > >> To: Hani Suleiman > >> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Subject: [Xdoclet-devel] RE: [Xdoclet-user] Xdoclet cvs issues > >> > >> First, Bootstrapper is gone (on the MODULE_REFACTROING_BRANCH). > >> I like your idea. What if we pass in an array of File objects to > >> ModuleFinder.findModules(File[] moduleDirs)? > >> This would default to the location of ant.jar, but can be overridden > > in > >> build.xml with a dirset (new Ant feature I think). > >> > >> You would get something like this: > >> > >> <ejbdoclet ...> > >> <!-- optional if module jars are in a different place than ant.jar > > --> > >> <moduledirs> > >> <include name="${standard.modules.dir}"/> > >> <include name="${myown.modules.dir}"/> > >> </moduledirs> > >> > >> ... > >> > >> <ejbdoclet> > >> > >> What do you others think? > >> > >> /Aslak > >> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: www-data [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Hani > > Suleiman > >>> Sent: 29. april 2002 14:22 > >>> To: Aslak Hellesoy > >>> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> Subject: RE: [Xdoclet-user] Xdoclet cvs issues > >>> > >>> > >>> I'll try and find the time to sort out the ant issue, by talking to > >>> them/submitting a patch or whatever. However, I still think the way > > that > >>> xdoclet has been changed is not an ideal design. > >>> > >>> Why not, for example, allow for a plugin directory set to be > >>> supplied to the > >>> bootstrap task? Right now it just assumes that plugins will be > >>> all jar files > >>> alongside xdoclet.jar, which while covering the most common > >>> usage, does not > >>> cover the case where your module jars might be in different > >>> places (eg, say > >>> you're testing a new jar, that is in another build tree, and you > >>> want to link > >>> that in), just allowing for a 'module-dir' attribute would > >>> achieve the same > >>> effect I think, as well as bypassing the ant classloader bug. > >>> > >>> Quoting Aslak Hellesoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >>> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Xdoclet-devel mailing list > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xdoclet-devel > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Xdoclet-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xdoclet-devel _______________________________________________ Xdoclet-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xdoclet-devel
