Jesse didn't closed the vote yet, but there is quiet a lot of 50/50 on the first question.
Maybe an intermediary solution would be to have 2 source directories. One for all core classes and tasks, and a second one regrouping all optional tasks. Gilles Scokart On 24 May 2010 12:08, Kevin Jackson <foamd...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 9:11 AM, Jesse Glick <jesse.gl...@oracle.com> > wrote: > > Should the Ant source tree (src/main/ and perhaps also src/tests/) be > split > > into subtrees? > > > > [ ] No, leave it the way it is - one big tree, using <selector> to > > conditionally compile pieces and route classes to various JARs. > > > > [ ] Yes, split it into subtrees, where each tree maps to an output JAR, > may > > have its own classpath, and is compiled completely or not at all. > > I'm 50/50 on this - on the one hand having it in separate trees is > both more sensible and *should* make releases easier (reduces reliance > on selectors etc). > > On the other hand the fact that the ant build file is complex allows > it to be used as a source of examples of how to deal with a gnarly > build. > > > > > > > And while we're at it: > > > > Should ant.jar and ant-nodeps.jar be consolidated? > > > > [ ] No, leave these as two JAR outputs (and two subtrees if the first > > proposal is accepted). > > > > [ x ] Yes, merge them into one ant.jar (and one subtree " " " " " "), to > > include all tasks and types with no linkage-level deps on 3rd-party > > libraries (even if there is an implicit dep on a 3rd-party tool such as > > Perforce), and remove the "Core" vs. "Optional" distinction in the > manual. > > Absolutely +1 on remove the core vs optional distinction in the manual > > Kev > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org > >
