Stefan wrote:
> I really like the simplicity of your approach - as my own first > build files all followed a linear pattern that could have been > expressed without any targets. I feel my opposition against tasks > on the same level as targets fade a little. I just hope that this is not because I am wearing you down! ;-) > So the case where there are no targets at all is easy to > understand and describe. Agreed. > Given > > <project default="a" ...> > <task1 /> > > <target name="a"> > <task2 /> > </target> > > <task3 /> > </project> > > would the user expect task3 to be executed before task2 - as it > would be if I understood the idea of tasks outside of targets > correctly? For now, I would suggest we keep it simple: only allow tasks to appear before or inside of targets. There is no loss in functionallity, and it would tend to keep the build.xml files more readible. If there is a need for this later, we can certainly relax the restriction easily enough. Pseudo-dtd: <!ELEMENT project (task*, target*)> - Sam Ruby
