on 2000/06/20 01:45, Peter Donald at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > well if I was a voting member I would go +1 but because I aint I will just > say good :P. Thou don't see why the properties/taskdefs don't get treated > exactly like tasks (except that maybe they can never be overidden) so are > you asking for just a philosophical distinction and safety net so some-one > cant add their own task named taskdef ???
No, a chicken is not a worm is not a mammal. Properties != Taskdefs != Tasks. Sure, you could drive taskdefs from properties (or even derive such as taskdef extends property but since this is XML and not Java...), but I think that they really should be seperate beasts and treated as seperate collections of things. .duncan
