Why not just try Ant 1.5Beta1 on a development box with a local build and see how it fares with your build? Surely you're set up for such a situation, right?! :)) If there are problems, then you can report back to us and we might be able to have it fixed for Beta 2, but there haven't been many show stopper issues.... the one regression bug in <propertyfile> is the one I'm aware of (yeah, my fault!) and perhaps some others, but its quite stable.
I hope everyone realizes that the CVS HEAD version of Ant is used to build tons of Sourceforge and Jakarta projects (and probably from other sources too) at least once or twice a day using Gump - http://jakarta.apache.org/gump - so Ant stays "stable" for the most part. I don't know what would be involved - it wasn't a big change needed to get MDB's supported - it just needed to check for that XML element like it does the others. Erik ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kyle Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 4:09 PM Subject: Re: MDB, Ant 1.4.1, and <ejbjar> Alright, now we might be crossing into the realm of ant-dev, but what all would be involved in hacking Ant 1.4.1 to support MDBs? I know Ant 1.5 uses the BCEL to discover dependencies in the various EJB classes, but in my limited understanding, one wouldn't need that robust of introspection to support MDBs. Is that correct? Also, how stable is Ant 1.5, beta 1? The project in question would be going into a production environment at the end of June - will Ant 1.5 be ready to build production applications at that time? Just trying to evaluate our options for dealing with this problem. Kyle >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/09/02 02:50PM >>> I'm sure it would cause problems and I never recommend anything like mixing and matching JAR's like that. You'll have to do some patching and rebuild Ant 1.4.1 plus that change to get working then. Erik -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
