Peter Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alternatively we could integrate this functionality with (2) so that > we could have something like. > > <fileset ...> > <include name="*.sh"/> > <mapper type="unix-permissions"> > <param name="user" value="ant"/> > <param name="group" value="ant"/> > <param name="mod" value="755"/> > </mapper> > </fileset>
So "modifier" might be more appropriate? I wouldn't want to fold too much into fileset, it should try to be a simple collection IMHO. > Thou with all these variations it may be advantageour to also define > a highlevel simple format that gets transformed into this low-level > format via xslt. Yes, this is getting rather complex and this is my major concern as well. But we need to do something before every task invents its own variation of fileset. Stefan
