I tend to agree that a 'private' tag could be misconstrued as doing more than just hiding a task from commandline invocation. I think that a -targets or -printtargets would be useful as long as it's only intended to refresh your memory as to what targets are contained in your buildfile. I like the idea of a <description>, but perhaps it should be an optional attribute of the <target> tag.
K.C. Baltz > -----Original Message----- > From: Conor MacNeill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 8:57 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [PATCH] Suggestion for new commandline switch -targets > > > Tim, > > > A thought I had at the time of the <help> conversation hooks up > > nicely here. > > Why not simply have an optional nested element for <target> > > called <description> > > or something like that, which provided verbiage of what the > task does, who > > should use it etc. Then the proposed 'ant -targets' could print > > descriptions > > along with the list of targets. For most people, I *hope*, this > > would simply be > > an exercise of moving text from some XML comments into a defined > > element.... > > Agreed. Pretty much agrees with what I suggested, I think. My > point was that > a list of targets, on its own lacks enough information to be > useful but > enough to be dangerous. > > I would prefer -targets therefore to be changed to support > printing this > help information. Perhaps -targets is no longer an > appropriate option label. > It should become a general project information dump, printing > project level > help, a list of targets, with their associated help. Perhaps > -info or -docs? > > I am not too keen on the "private" flag for targets, though. > > thoughts? Marcel? >
