Peter Donald wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:31, Charles Benett wrote: > > Here's a thought: can we get rid of all the build.sh/build.bat and > > ant.jar etc? > > nice idea but not yet good in practice I don't think. Anything that requires > me to do more than > > cvs co myproject > cd myproject > ./build.sh > > is too much IMHO :)
on the other hand, for a one-off investment in installing ant you can save 7 characters by going 'ant' rather than './build.sh' :-) More seriously, we get rid of two jars (ant and optional) and a bunch of scripts. And, for my money, its a lot easier to work out what's happening without chains of scripts to follow. > > > Here's why: as currently written, I think, if you already have ANT_HOME > > defined then the build script won't use jakarta-avalon/tools/lib and so > > will miss optional.jar. (Which makes the junit task fail in excalibur). > > > > Either we can make the scripts more complicated to check for junit in a > > pre-existing ANT_HOME or we can simply tell people that they need to > > download and install ant with junit. Then we can remove the build > > scripts and execute the buildfile by invoking 'ant' directly. > > alternatively we can go > > unset ANT_HOME > > in each script? save-unset-reset? I'd still prefer not to include ant. Charles --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
