From: Dave N. <mr_...@ya...> - 2003-05-21 02:34:09
|
No. Isn't much of the JBoss-specific functionality in XDoclet written by the JBG (David Jencks in particular)? And doesn't that ultimately end up back in the main XDoclet project? If Ant needs to be enhanced in order to support a project like JBoss, don't we think the Ant developers and maintainers would appreciated the added functionality? I dont' mean to be an Ant bigot, and I have nothing other than my own lack of knowledge against BM, to be honest. But Ant is by now the "standard" Java build tool. It makes more sense to me to leverage that by contributing features & capabilities to Ant, and to let someone else (Ant maintainers) worry about crap like regressions, etc than to have JBoss developers worry about things other than the preload cache, JBoss regressions etc, get my drift? I'd extend Scott's logic to: "Show me those deficiencies in Ant that made buildmagic necessary, and if they really are deficiencies and not 'nice to haves' (as Scott and Jason both said, a good portion of the BM functionality seems to be largely unused), and let's fix Ant so that there's no need to extend Ant by writing custom Tasks." All we are talking about is building a (complex) Java project, after all. If you ask me, JBoss is the gold standard project for vanilla Ant. If it can build JBoss, it can build arbitrary Java projects, and only people who need source cross-references or CVS activity reports by developer need to turn to some other tool. Dave --- Andy Godwin <and...@us...> wrote: > > Which is why the question was posed as "Why go > forward with buildmagic?", > not > > "How do I fix buildmagic to work with Ant 1.5.3?" > Stripping bm down to the > > minimal essentials as suggested by Jason to run > would be good, but I don't > think > > its worth keeping this wrapper layer at all. > Demonstrate why Ant will not > work > > before discussing why I need a leaner bm. > > But isn't BM, this "wrapper layer", just a set of > taskdefs, as are all Ant > extensions? > ... they add functionality that isn't available in > plain vanilla Ant. > > If you want to use Ant, and I see no reason why not, > it's solid, widely > understood, > etc [insert other reasons already posted here] then > to add the extra bits > JBoss > needs you have to write additional tasks, just like > BM. > > Sama, sama. > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: ObjectStore. > If flattening out C++ or Java code to make your > application fit in a > relational database is painful, don't do it! Check > out ObjectStore. > Now part of Progress Software. > http://www.objectstore.net/sourceforge > _______________________________________________ > Jboss-development mailing list > Jbo...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com |