Ah, I understand. The first time I tried to create a new task I didn't know what to do, it was those folks I was thinking about. We also have the optional.jar using an optional task w/o the optional.jar will give that error message also.
Erik. > -----Original Message----- > From: Jose Alberto Fernandez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, November 10, 2000 8:02 PM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: [PATCH] UnknownElement > > > My point is that there should not be (1), (2), ... > Just the message about using <taskdef>. > The other ones are irrelevant for real users which are not > modifying the code. And if you are modifying the code, > then it should be obvious to you what to do. > > Jose Alberto > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Erik Meade [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Friday, November 10, 2000 2:10 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: [PATCH] UnknownElement > > > > > > Which message? Number 2 is use taskdef to define your task. > > > > Erik > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Jose Alberto Fernandez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Friday, November 10, 2000 10:42 AM > > > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > > > Subject: RE: [PATCH] UnknownElement > > > > > > > > > I always thought that this message was kind of funny. > > > Is like a Java program saying ClassNotFoundException: > > > "You may need to revise your classpath, or reinstall > > > your JVM to a JDK that contains this class or see > > > if you made a typo in the class name". > > > > > > I think we should just say: 'Unknown task "XYZ" > > > use <taskdef> to define it before using it'. > > > > > > Jose Alberto > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Erik Meade [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2000 8:21 PM > > > > To: Conor MacNeill; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Subject: RE: [PATCH] UnknownElement > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Conor MacNeill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2000 7:55 PM > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Subject: RE: [PATCH] UnknownElement > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Erik, > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for re-sending that. I did apply this change locally > > > > but I haven't > > > > > committed yet for two reasons: > > > > > > > > > > 1. The message is now getting pretty long and I thought perhaps > > > > > it should be > > > > > formatted rather than one huge line > > > > > > > > Cool, I wanted to do that, but wasn't sure how it would go > > > > over. Do you > > > > think \n or \n\t is enough? > > > > > > > > > 2. I am not sure of the target audience of this message. If we > > > > > are targeting > > > > > users who download a binary distribution, then telling them to > > > > > bootstrap/build is not that cool since those scripts are > > > > not even included > > > > > in the binary distribution. > > > > > > > > Good point, one thing I was thinking of doing was checking to > > > > see if the > > > > task was optional, but the list where valid tasks are > > storied doesn't > > > > differenciate between optional and built in. I was also > > > > thinking I could > > > > parse the properties file, but I wasn't sure how that would > > > > go over either. > > > > > > > > For the bootstrap we could use ANT_HOME and see if bootstrap > > > > is in there... > > > > that assumes developers don't move it though, then bin users > > > > wouldn't even > > > > see it. > > > > > > > > > It is not a big deal, but I thought we should just think about > > > > > who we expect > > > > > to get this message and under what circumstances. What > > do you think? > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Conor MacNeill > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Cortex eBusiness > > > > > http://www.cortexebusiness.com.au > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: Erik Meade [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Sent: Friday, 10 November 2000 14:22 > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Subject: RE: [PATCH] UnknownElement > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm reposting this as it didn't get commited, folks still ask > > > > > > about it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: Erik Meade [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 6:12 PM > > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [PATCH] UnknownElement > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now reads: if this is an optional task put the > > > > optional.jar in the > > > > > > > lib directory of your ant installation (ANT_HOME) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > From: Conor MacNeill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 5:42 AM > > > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [PATCH] UnknownElement > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Erik, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps it would be better to say "put optional.jar in the > > > > > > lib directory > > > > > > > > of your ant installation (ANT_HOME)" > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Conor > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > From: Erik Meade [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, 25 October 2000 15:13 > > > > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [PATCH] UnknownElement > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Added in putting option.jar in your classpath > > if it is an > > > > > > > > > optional task. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > From: Erik Meade [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2000 7:31 PM > > > > > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [PATCH] UnknownElement > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Added in Nico's suggestion. > > > > > > > > > > Erik > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > From: Erik Meade > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2000 7:10 AM > > > > > > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [PATCH] UnknownElement > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Probably, at the risk of appearing > > uninformed... what is > > > > > > > > > > > involved with using taskdef to declare you > > task? I've > > > > > > > > > > > created new tasks, so my guess is I've done > > this, but > > > > > > > > > > > I'm not sure I know what I did... I'll send another > > > > > > > > > > > patch tonight or tomorrow and add it in > > above "add the > > > > > > > > > > > task to the defaults.properties" as > > suggested by Stefan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Erik Meade > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Nico Seessle > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2000 12:35 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] UnknownElement > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > > > > > > > From: "Erik Meade" > > > > > > > > > > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2000 6:59 AM > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [PATCH] UnknownElement > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I thought it may be a good idea to list some > > > > > solutions with > > > > > > > > > > > > > the maybeConfigure build exception. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Erik Meade > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "1 execute bin/bootstrap. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2 add the task to the defaults.properties." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Isn't this missing "3 use taskdef to declare > > > > your task?" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nico > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
