+1 (non-binding) to kill the build.xml
+1 to rename build-ant1.5.xml to build.xml :)

-- dims

--- Axl Mattheus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Berin Lautenbach wrote:
> 
> >>>- tests now run
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>They didn't before? I changed it to not rely on a junit.jar in the lib
> >>directory, but instead on a junit included in the ant lib directory.
> >>But I  noticed that you put the junit jar back into the classpath.
> >>Didn't it work  for you? Or did you not have junit in your ant lib
> >>directory?
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >Oops.  My deepest apologies - they did work.  What didn't work was the
> >specific tests (ant -f build-ant1.5 test_xenc).  I got them working, but
> >it was a very minor change.
> >
> >The ant one works fine if you are using a <junit> task (which is how ant
> >test works), but the test_xenc stuff calles junit from a java task. 
> >Probably the cleaner way to fix it would be to set up test_xenc as a junit
> >task.
> >
> >  
> >
> >>I was also wondering why you had a commented out <!--path
> >>refid="id.classpath.coverage" /--> in your id.classpath, where I didn't
> >> have it in the original, but maybe I have commented it out in the
> >>meantime  :)
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >I don't *think* I touched that.  I also just checked the cvs record (BTW -
> >did I tell people that the cvs mailing list is now archived at
> >xml.apache.org/mail/security-cvs ?) and it doesn't appear I changed it, so
> >I'm blaming you <GRIN>.
> >
> >  
> >
> >>In any case I am fairly certain it can go :)
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>- header at startup (version etc.)
> >>>- build src and distribution archives
> >>>- external call to forrest to build docs
> >>>
> >>>Could people have a look?  I've tried to strip everything right back
> >>>to basics, but there may be simpler/cleaner ways to do things, so feel
> >>>free to comment and/or change directly!
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>Well.. I have been playing around with making 3 build files to split up
> >> functionality.
> >>
> >>How about we have seperate build files for:
> >>
> >>- Samples
> >>- Distributions
> >>- Normal development (compile, test etc)
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >I like that.  I assume they would all be included into the one high level
> >build.xml?  My only constraint woudl be can we wait until post 1.1?  I'm
> >already wary that I'm doing some large changes to the build file just
> >prior to release.
> >  
> >
> +1.
> 
> >  
> >
> >>>Are we happy to move to this as the formal build.xml?
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>I can't wait to get rid of the beast :)
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> ><GRIN>.  I'll take that as a +1.  It's got +1 from me as well.  If I get
> >no vetos, lets make the change.  We can rename the old one
> >build-ant.deprecated or some such.
> >  
> >
> I was sick of build.xml eons ago - that is why I started 
> build-ant1.5.xml. The world would be a better place without 
> xml-security/build.xml. +1 to kill it.
> 
> >Cheers,
> >     Berin
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> 


=====
Davanum Srinivas - http://webservices.apache.org/~dims/

Reply via email to