Ramon Felciano wrote: >Great -- thanks. That did the trick. I saw Sam's message about the "original >design intent" -- are these documented somewhere? I'm particularly trying to >understand what Ant is NOT trying to do (assuming it isn't going to >feature-creep its way towards make :-) ). For example, if you are building a >project that involves the configuring of 3rd party tools (e.g. Apache), >would you actually do that configuration via Ant? Or is Ant for builds only, >leaving installs as a separate activity.
If they were, I wouldn't have made the mistake of removing top level taskdefs and properties! Given the design of Ant, I believe that you are on safe grounds with virtually any new task. Even it if is not accepted as part of the core, you can always use it yourself via taskdef. - Sam Ruby
