On Jun 4, 2004, at 10:19 AM, Dominique Devienne wrote:
From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Erik already brought that up. Target foo imported from project named
bar is known as "foo" in my build file unless I override it (in which
case it becomes "bar.foo". I'd like to have the alias name "bar.foo"
available even if I don't override it.
I haven't looked into the code yet, but are there any principal
objections? Target time-frame would be 1.6.2.
Kinda... This allows to bypass the target override, and thus bypass
whatever the overridden target does. It's kind of like allowing any
class in Java to use C++'s Class::method(), i.e. static binding when
dynamic binding to any overridden method() was the intent.
Or perhaps I misunderstand the issue. I guess I don't understand the
purpose of this. Targets are akin to Java interfaces to me, i.e. they
define a contract, and if a 'derived' build script overrides target
A for example, what's the meaning of this same build script also
calling base.A (outside of the derived A itself), or worse, what's the
meaning of a further derived2 script to call base.A, bypassing
derived.A (derived2 imports derived, which import base)?
I'm not -1, and even then it'd be non-binding, but I don't understand
the need for this. --DD
pasted from my original message on this:
imported.xml
<project name="imported">
<target name="some-target"/>
</project>
build.xml
<project name="build">
<import file="imported.xml">
<target name="another-target" depends="imported.some-target"/>
</project>
Doesn't work, since some-target is not overridden.
------
It would be nice if imported.some-target existed as an alias always.
Erik
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
