On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, Peter Donald wrote: > On Tue, 19 Feb 2002 03:02, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Peter Donald wrote: > > > > Maybe we should link it from our resources page so that people know > > > > what we are working on? > > > > > > If you recall I have already mentioned that some people are playing with > > > that already ;) One of my main reasons for separating the task engine > > > from the project engine but unfortunately that idea was KBed ;( > > > > I don't remember this event - can you give more details ? Was it a problem > > with the idea or the implementation ? > > idea.
I'll try to search the archives. One of my pains today is the ProjectHelper - and I think the best solution is to separate it and make it pluggable i.e. other 'helper engines' could be used, assuming the 'contracts' are respected ( it's backward compatible ). Other engines could provide additional features like namespace support, axis style of handlers, maybe even additional syntactic constructs. Since those are not part of ant, but extensions ( like user tasks), nobody can complain what's inside. This is similar with 'pluggable task engine'. I assume the 'task engine' is the code in Project that resovles target deps and calls the tasks. Refactoring the code ( with the current API preserved, wrapping the new class ) seem to me like a decent ( and similar ) proposal, that would be benefical for ant. Is anything that I'm missing here ? Costin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
