On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, Steve Loughran wrote: > > 2 properties file is not bad - META-INF/anttasks.properties, > > anttypes.properties. > > > > If we stop making the distinction between task and types ( i.e allow > > tasks at top level ) there is no need for 2 properties files, > > if something extends Task or has execute() it is a task, if not > > type. > > and > antconditions.properties > antejbjar.properties > antserverdeploy.properties > ...etc
Not sure what those are - I think we should reduce the distinctions between "task" and "type", not to create other entities. > so we would be using the zip file system for structure, rather than a single > XML file First, this is not necesarily bad. At least in my experience most people seems to deal much better with a file structure rather than editing an XML file ( acording to even a well-defined DTD as web.xml ). I would also point to Unix systems - where typically you edit a config file, but most new distributions of linux and most new packages allow a file-based organization and that proves to be much easier for tools ( I'm talking about menu systems on kde/gnome, cron, rc.d, etc ). I agree with the use of an XML file to consolidate the info - but at least for task definitions we should keep the existing practice, and keep it simple for the most common things. Costin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
