> I think this is sufficient in 99.9% scenarios so if we don't find merge be
> useful we could always implement this [I have it in some state already]
> Should such implementation include even excludes from referenced fileset?
I suggest the following evaluation semantics:
<fileset>
<includes name="xxx.*" />
<includes>
<fileset>
<includes name="yyy.*" />
</fileset>
</includes>
<excludes>
<fileset>
<includes name="*.*" />
<excludes name="AAA" />
</fileset>
</excludes>
</fileset>
Means:
1. find all files matching "xxx.*" and convert them to the set of filenames
(L1)
2. find all files matching "yyy.*" and convert them to the set of filenames
(L2)
3. find all files matching "*.*" and convert them to the set of filenames
(L3)
4. find all files matching "AAA.*" and convert them to the set of filenames
(L4)
the resulting fileset is (in terms of the set algebra, + means union, -
means difference)
L1 + L2 - (L3 - L4)
so (because we're excluding almost every file but AAA.*) this means the same
as:
<fileset>
<includes name="AAA.*" />
</fileset>
I propose a rule, which I think is quite intuitive:
----
Every time you <include> or <exclude> a fileset, resolve it to a set of
files and proceed with include/exclude as if it was specified as a series of
<include name="..." /> or <exclude name="..." />
----
Awaiting comments.
Jarek
-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004
Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration
See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA.
http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn
_______________________________________________
nant-developers mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers
