----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Gert Driesen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The thing I get from this is that what we are losing is the failure
> message we have from the plain output and this failure message is
> reported outside of any targets or tasks. My suggestion is therefore
> that we simply add a <failure> tag, so that the xml looks like:
>
> <buildresults project="example">
> <message level="Info"><![CDATA[Buildfile:
> file:///C:/tools/eclipse/workspace/ccnet/temp.build]]></message>
> <message level="Info"><![CDATA[Target(s) specified:
> okthenfail]]></message>
> <failure>
>
>
<location><![CDATA[C:\tools\eclipse\workspace\ccnet\temp.build(9,5)]]></loca
tion>
> <message><![CDATA[This is a failure]]></message>
> </failure>
> <target name="ok">
> <task name="echo">
> <message level="Info"><![CDATA[This is OK]]></message>
> </task>
> </target>
> <target name="fail">
> <task name="fail" />
> </target>
> </buildresults>
Should we only output the message of an exception, or also the stacktrace ?
How should we represent nested exceptions in the xml log?
should we have something like this ?
<buildfailure>
<location> ... </location>
<message> ... </message>
<stacktrace> ... </stacktrace>
<buildfailure>
<location> ... </location>
<message> ... </message>
<stacktrace> ... </stacktrace>
</buildfailure>
</buildfailure>
should we only output the stacktrace for the "top" exception ?
should we use <internalfailure> for internal errors (non-buildexceptions) or
use <failure type="build | internal"> ? Only buildexceptions have a
location, so the location element would only be valid for them.
>
> Optionally, it would be nice to add an attribute to the 'buildresults'
> root tag called 'success' that is either "true" or "false".
We can't do this, as the xml is not buffered.
>
> It would also be good to introduce a <time units="seconds"> tag, that
> could be used both underneath the top level to indicate the time for the
> whole build, and maybe also for each target to show how long each target
> takes.
yes, this would definitely be useful, but I guess it should be called
something like elapsedtime or buildtime ... and not sure if we need the
units attribute
Gert
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now.
Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with
a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click
_______________________________________________
Nant-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-users
