Dominique Devienne wrote: > Tell me what's the point of AntLib if it's just to define tasks/types?
That's what currently supports tasks and types. There is no notion of role at this moment in ant. I don't know how you twisted my words into "I don't want roles". I just don't want roles implemented this way, and I want the antlib to do one thing well, When roles are added to ant, in one form or another, we can add them to antlib. Are you saying that those roles can't be used without antlib ? > Sounds like you have never needed to write anything but custom tasks and > types Costin, but it is a major deficiency of Ant not be able to plug in a > consistent manner all these other 'types' of typed bean you so easily > dismiss. --DD I don't dismiss the the types, nor the consistency. I dismiss bundling the concept of roles with that of antlib, and the idea that there is only one possible implementation for that ( i.e. what's now in antlib ). You can have the same "role" using interfaces or using introspection or using external metadata. And you can have an antlib that deals with loading components - without caring what kind of components they are, and this is a simpler and better implementation ( IMO ) Costin
