I think I like most Tim suggestion - using <description> tag within targets. I do no like "private" keyword somehow either, but I think maybe we will not list any targets which do not have this <description> ? Then you can filter out -check_for_optional_packages simply by not putting description there.
Why all the targets in the listing are prefixed with leading - ? This is confusing as what the target is, shall I call: ant -install ? ant -targets ? or ant install, ant targets I think this leading '-' is not necessary and should be removed, especially as it is in conflict with things like -targets or -docs, etc. Maybe it would be nice to sort out targets before printing them out? cheers Mariusz > Both Conor and KC seem to be not so keen on the 'private' flag for targets. > What are your objections? > > I've tried my patch on ant's own build.xml with this result: > > Buildfile: build.xml > Targets: `> -install > -dist-tgz > -dist > -dist-zip > -compile > -fullinstall > -get.snapshot > -javadocs > -check_for_optional_packages > -total-clean > -bootstrap > -main > -jar > -prepare > -compiletests > -clean > -make.snapshot > -runtests > > I definitely miss a description for each target but it would also be very > useful if something like 'check_for_optional_packages' was filtered out > > Regards, > Marcel Schutte > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: KC Baltz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: maandag 14 augustus 2000 15:06 > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > Subject: RE: [PATCH] Suggestion for new commandline switch -targets > > > > > > 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?
