Anyone???
On 5/24/05, Jamie Bisotti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My source tree looks like the following:
> src/conf/foo1/blah1.properties
> src/conf/foo2/blah2.properties
> ...
> src/conf/fooN/blahN.properties
> ...
>
> and I'd like for the target tree to look like the following:
> target/classes/blah1.properties
> target/classes/blah2.properties
> ...
> target/classes/blahN.properties
>
> I could do it with multiple <resource> elements, like this:
> <resource>
> <directory>${basedir}/src/conf/foo1</directory>
> <includes>
> <include>*.properties</include>
> </includes>
> </resource>
> ...
> <resource>
> <directory>${basedir}/src/conf/fooN</directory>
> <includes>
> <include>*.properties</include>
> </includes>
> </resource>
>
> but, there will be a lot of "foo" subdirectories and I'd like not to
> have to add 6 lines for each one to my project.xml. So, I tried the
> following:
>
> <resource>
> <directory>${basedir}/src/conf</directory>
> <includes>
> <include>**/*.properties</include>
> </includes>
> </resource>
>
> However, this creates target/classes/fooN/blahN.properties.
>
> So, is there a way to "flatten"/lose the directory structure on the
> resource copy? I didn't go look it up, but I'm pretty sure Ant
> provides a way to do that. If it isn't currently possible, does
> anyone think it might make a good enhancement?
>
> --
> Jamie Bisotti
> Software Engineer
> Lexmark International, Inc.
>
--
Jamie Bisotti
Software Engineer
Lexmark International, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
