Thanks for the explanation Stefan.

--- Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jul 2003, M. Sean Gilligan
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Putting the Fop task directly in Ant would be
> great.  I would really
> > like to see that happen.  I suppose we could get
> it in Ant 1.6 if we
> > submit it soon.  Does anyone know what the
> criteria is for inclusion
> > as a "Core" or "Optional" task within Ant?  What
> work would be
> > required on our part?
> Actually, it is not too likely to get accepted at
> all (I'm an Ant
> committer and PMC member, but I'm just speaking for
> myself here - some
> of it still is speculation).
> Over the past months (no, years) we've spent a lot
> of time maintaining
> optional tasks and fixing bugs in them, more time
> than we spent on
> improving Ant itself.  As a consequence you'll find
> a big reluctance
> with Ant developers to accept any new tasks at all. 

I see.  Perfectly understandable, as you would not
want poorly maintained optional tasks ending up
degrading Ant's reputation as a build tool.  I was not
thinking about this when I made the suggestion.

> Not having followed the discussion leading up to
> this, why would you
> want to ship it with Ant rather than FOP?

My (limited world-view) thinking prior to your
explanation was that when open-source projects hit The
Big Time (tm), they get their own task directly into
Ant.  So I saw that as a goal for us in FOP 1.0.  But
with Sean pointing out the FOP version-specific nature
of the FOP task, as well as your
explanation have enlightened me on this issue:  In
FOP, and only in FOP, will the <fop> task be


Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to