On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Luke Taylor <[email protected]>wrote:
> I quite like the idea of a url - I think you can still do this with "apply > from:" (which points to an additional gradle file). > Yes. > > One problem with using simple names, like "android" (or "aspectj" or > "docbook") for non-core plugins is that it gives the impression there is a > definitive version, when in fact there may be more than one and they are not > under the control of the main Gradle project. I think that's best avoided. > Even with maven, the plugins are scoped by the groupId. > As I said in the other mail I have just send. I think you are right. You are providing an argument I haven't thought about yet (I was just worried about namespace conflicts). - Hans -- Hans Dockter Founder, Gradle http://www.gradle.org, http://twitter.com/gradleorg CEO, Gradle Inc. - Gradle Training, Support, Consulting http://www.gradle.biz > Of course, I could be completely wrong :). But I'm curious to see how the > Gradle plugin concept evolves and deals with these issues. > > Luke. > > > On 23/04/2010 15:15, Jason Voegele wrote: > >> On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 09:40 -0400, Philip Crotwell wrote: >> >> Perhaps a related thought, at one point in the pre0.9 timeframe, you >>> could do something like this: >>> >>> apply url: 'http://github.com/hansd/huglins/raw/master/fatjar.gradle' >>> >> >> Hi Philip, >> >> I do like the "apply url:" feature as a general extension mechanism, but >> I would still prefer to be able to apply plugins by simple name without >> having to know any URL where it is located. I think it would be much >> easier to tell people to apply(plugin: 'android') as opposed to having >> to specify URLs that change over time. I would like to be able to say: >> >> apply plugin: 'android' >> >> once and for all and know that it will always work. >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > >
