On 8/4/06, Ross Gardler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mathieu Champlon wrote:
>>
>> Ross Gardler closed FOR-913.
>> ----------------------------
>>
>> Resolution: Invalid
>>
>> forrest.properties has nothing to do with ant. It provides
>> configuration values for forrest.
>>
>> A forrest.properties file is required.
>>
>
...
> What I was trying to explain is that a forrest.properties file seems
> indeed required while its content isn't.
> If you seed a new project and remove everything from the
> forrest.properties file, it builds fine (using default configuration).
> But if you remove the (now empty) file, the build breaks.
>
> In the context of several projects with an automated/centralized build
> process, it isn't very convenient to maintain a forrest.properties file
> for each project.
...
> For example if the proxy configuration must be changed, it's much easier
> to change it in one place rather than going through every project.
...
OK, that all makes sense. But how is this changed by having a blank
forrest.properties file? (rhetorical question... keep reading)
> I understand that it might not be considered a bug, especially with such
> an easy workaround (an empty forrest.properties file).
...
> Maybe this could be a feature request ?
...
> By the way the patch is really simple, involving only a couple of java
> lines in forrest.
Then why not provide us with a patch? (again a rhetorical question, keep
reading, I just want to point out we need your help)
I've applied a guard around the necessary code. It should now work
without a forrest.properties file.
I'd just point out that he offered to provide a patch (e.g. "I can
provide a patch.") but likely got the perception it wouldn't be
well-received because the issue was closed on him. He now knows to
discuss onlist first though...
--tim
