> > I don't think what you do with your <script> stuff is open to anyone's > objections -- it's available for whatever you choose to do with it. In > fact, the same could be said for any *Java* tasks you want to write for > yourself as well. For example, there's the <case> task that (hope I'm > remembering right) Nico wrote (which I'll probably put to use myself > before long).
Yes, a simple <case> task would be great, if it does what I am guessing it does. Where can we get this, will it be rolled into Ant 1.3? > > In general, I'd be much happier with a Java-oriented build tool that had > built into it a greater level of programmability, but which could have > that separate from the build-files themselves -- in other words, one that > didn't have its "bones" showing, so that people dealing with the build at > the level of just adding/deleting files to be processed could work with > much simpler files. I'm sure people will say "But you can do that with > Ant" -- yeah, maybe, if I knew Java (and all the various parsing tools, > etc., etc.) and if I could take the time to sit down and write all the > code I'd need to accomplish that. Which I don't at this point, for either > if. > I agree. The simple short-comings should be addressed in Ant, instead of forcing people to write esoteric <script> tasks. Jason
