> In fact, I'd much prefer the xml to be: > [...] > Or rather: > > <project name="a"> > <depend project="b"> > <output type="jar" id="basic" runtime="true"/> > <output type="jar" id="extension1" runtime="true"/> > <output type="native-lib" id="fancy-feature" optional="true"/> > </depend> > </project> >
I'd go for this (although perhaps <artifact not <output) and maybe have more attributes on the depend element, to avoid repetition (e.g. have runtime setable there.) That said, I think it really comes down to how much complexity we want to allow here, or even ... how much is actually needed by users. Let's at least split out these sub-elements, and work on attributes in time. BTW: I suspect 'type' ought be on the declaration, not the dependency, right? No point duplicating that information, is there? regards Adam --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
