Your first responsibilty is to reproduce the old build so we can get on with using the new build.
I just feel the source-artificat definition is a hack, it is a way to hook something into ant as a marker for where you do the unpacking. My syntax more clearly expresses what the developer is trying to achieve without having to deal with the logistics of unpacking the jar (an implementation detail). The unpacked jar is neither source (an input to the build) or an artificat (an output of the build). It is just an intermediate construct due to the inability of ant to build one jar from the contents of another. You can ignore my asthetic points, in the interest of getting the build finished. We can revisit it later. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=3867683#3867683 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=3867683 ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ JBoss-Development mailing list JBoss-Development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
