At 02:00 3/4/01 +0200, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >Peter Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> However it is at higher complexity build files (medium->high >> complexity) where the advantage would be shown. Mainly as it would >> allow core to be clean and handling of tasks predictable. For big >> build processes it would allow customisation without magic variables >> (ala GUMPs sysclasspath) and added value (ie assign fee: namespace >> to something specific to buisness). > >So you propose namespaces to make the "aspect" system pluggable, am I >getting this right? You want a facility to say "I'll take >responsibility of all task attributes int the baz namespace"?
yup ! ;l >This probably is the cleanest way to separate such knowledge about any >facility from Ant's core. But we still need a way to leave the basic >things - like failonerror behavior - that would be provided by stock >Ant simple. agreed. > >Stefan > > Cheers, Pete *-----------------------------------------------------* | "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, | | and proving that there is no need to do so - almost | | everyone gets busy on the proof." | | - John Kenneth Galbraith | *-----------------------------------------------------*
