a few additional 1p comments; Ant is a 'disruptive' tool e.g. many developers can quickly get on with their work using the tool whilst the declaritive format makes composition trivial; hands up for those who have spent hours plastering make builds together...PERL and make vie for the low scanability award...though this doesnt mean that Ant doesnt also suffer from low readibility...there are whole groups of developers who find XML an impenetrable format...I am not of that group.
IF a project is big enough in scope its quite common for no one tool to solve the build problem...this might be a 'warm body' problem which means u need to take the ready skills of those around you...or perhaps there are many complicated problem domains; politics aside...why not just use both Ant and make? note: Anthill pro integrates these two nicely btw In development teams, democracy tends to rule...which I would beware of; 3 alternate analagies of teams working together are; Chief Surgeon: One or few highly talented individuals with specialists Football (variations being real or american): Team approach, with medium level of skill throughout the pitch...with the coach as manager. Success is built on team playing well together though directed by management. another variation of Football is the; Orchestra: Sequencing and coordination of a group of highly talented individuals performed by conductor If your man is the 'coach', 'surgeon' or 'conductor' I would listen to him/her...otherwise if u think productivity will be limited by Ant let em use Make locally...its easy enough to invoke in Ant. Ant is wickedly useful outside of the context of building software.....one measurement of a tools usefulness and applicability is the extent to which it can be ab/used to solve problems quickly...this confuses matters appreciably. gl,jim fuller
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
