Humm, I think I sent the wrong ZIP file, the Patch file is fine.
Can you please put the classes on the attasched ZIP file, instead? It should be expanded on antlib/src. Sorry for the confusion. Thanks in advance, Jose Alberto ----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Hatcher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Ant Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 2:14 AM Subject: Re: [PATCH Antlib proposal] Second installment > I'd apply this, but *blush*.... could someone tell me how they go about > apply the patch files? Where should I get a patch.exe for Windows? > > The .zip only seemed to contain one new file (unless I'm confused) - > DataTypeAdapterTask. > > Erik > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jose Alberto Fernandez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Ant Project List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 10:30 PM > Subject: [PATCH Antlib proposal] Second installment > > > Hi, > > This is the second installment on the <antlib> proposal for ANT1.x. It > contains the following: > > - A patch file with changes for the files already in existance. > > - A zip file with new files to be added to proposal/sandbox/antlib/src > > With this installment, ProjectHelper and IntrospectionHelper have changed to > use the new Role based > mechanism for finding and construction tasks. And datatypes are created in > such a manner that > the type rules are not circumvented. > > In addition there is a testcase for testing <antjar> and <antlib>. > > The new code passes all the testcases defined for ANT except for two: > > 1) A test where the expected error message is now different. > > 2) One of the tests for the <description> element. Which cannot be used the > way it was because > the special rules it was using now are more strict and consistent. See > discussion later. > > I still think I can do further cleanup of the code and eliminate more of the > special code in ProjectHelper > but that would be as part of the third installment. > > Can one of the committers try a GUMP run using this version so as to find > out any broken things? > > The problem with <description>: > --------------------------------------- > > <description> elements as direct children of <project> work fine as > expected. What it works differently are > <description> elements inside <target>. > > The way <description> was implemented, nodes inside <target> where added to > the Project description during > instantiation of the project. However, nodes inside tasks implementing > TaskContainer were not taken into consideration. > Now all TaskContainers are treated equally, including Target, hence the > discrepancy. > > There are several ways of resolve the issue: > > 1) Make <description> only available at <project> level. > > 2) Change implementation of <description> so that is treated as part of the > syntax of <project> and <target> > instead of using a <datatype> that works by sideeffect. > > We can always keep the task arround for backward compatibility purposes. > > Jose Alberto > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<<attachment: antlib-src.zip>>
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
