I think the point here is not forbidding them, but encouraging new projects to "work out of the box" with "ant all" and not require build.sh/bat
I use build.sh and build.bat a lot at work, but there is only 4 developers and I have pretty tight control. -----Original Message----- From: Sam Ruby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, October 01, 2001 9:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Build.xml standardization Daniel Rall wrote: > > +1 on no build.{sh,bat} files...users should install Ant and use the > `ant` command. For that to work, Ant has to maintain backwards compatibility (which they have been pretty good about lately), and projects can't step up to the latest features until it has been released. Peter changed the jar task to accept a "file" attribute, deprecated "jarfile", and then proceeded to check in an updated ant.jar into the avalon projects. - Sam Ruby P.S. From personal experience, you can say that nobody should check in Ant jars or have build.{sh,bat} files, but people will check them in anyway. Even "-1"'s won't stop them. That's why I wrote Gump. I have a single build script which can build any project with the collection of jars that I specify. The fact that it produces nags that some people find helpful is just a fortunate byproduct . ;-) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
