Jeremias Maerki wrote:
Following a problem on fop-user I'd like to propose the removal of
ant.jar and the build.bar/sh pair. I've heard that best practice is not
to bundle Ant with a project, though I can't point you to a web page.
It's reasonable to expect that everybody who wants to compile a Jav
I can do that but someone will have to test the unix script for me.
On 11.12.2003 10:33:34 Peter B. West wrote:
> Removing ant, fair enough, but why the build scripts? Shouldn't they be
> extended a little to check for the presence of an ant installation and
> make appropriate noises if one isn
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
I can do that but someone will have to test the unix script for me.
On 11.12.2003 10:33:34 Peter B. West wrote:
Removing ant, fair enough, but why the build scripts? Shouldn't they be
extended a little to check for the presence of an ant installation and
make appropriate
I disagree on this point, if we're removing ant.jar, I
don't see a need for continuing to maintain a build.sh
and build.bat.
Given that they must install Ant, it isn't too
traumatic to next navigate to the fop working
directory and type "ant" to make the build. (I'm not
being sarcastic--the way
Glen Mazza wrote:
I disagree on this point, if we're removing ant.jar, I
don't see a need for continuing to maintain a build.sh
and build.bat.
Given that they must install Ant, it isn't too
traumatic to next navigate to the fop working
directory and type "ant" to make the build. (I'm not
being
I don't think ant should be removed from the maintenance branch.
Granted, users of HEAD should be adept enough to install and configure
ANT, but I think it is more important to make at least the
"maintenance" branch of FOP easy to use, than it is to encourage them
to install and configure ant.
Peter B. West wrote:
> Removing ant, fair enough, but why the build scripts? Shouldn't they be
> extended a little to check for the presence of an ant installation and
> make appropriate noises if one isn't found?
I agree.
Victor Mote
On tor, 2003-12-11 at 16:42, Clay Leeds wrote:
> I don't think ant should be removed from the maintenance branch.
> Granted, users of HEAD should be adept enough to install and configure
> ANT, but I think it is more important to make at least the
> "maintenance" branch of FOP easy to use, than
--- Clay Leeds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Web Maestro Clay
>
> p.s. I guess this means I get to add ant to my list
> of tools in my
> toolbox... :-)
>
Yes, highly transportable skills in CVS and Ant may be
the two biggest up-front goodies you get by working on
FOP.
Instructions:
1.) Downl
J.Pietschmann wrote:
Hmhm. The unix version (build.sh) added *all* jars in the
lib directory to the classpath, which made the "drop into
lib and call build.dh" much easier. If this has to be done
in build.xml, there's trouble ahead with jars containing
release identifiers and such ugly stuff.
Well,
10 matches
Mail list logo
