Nadav Soferman wrote:
knowledge in the various open-source licenses. Invicta should be used freely
by anyone (similar to ANT) and an appropriate license should be used (any
suggestions?).
If so, you should consider the same license as for Ant.
http://ant.apache.org/license.html
I looked for t
On 27/11/03 10:16 AM,Stefan Bodewig wrote:
An alternative to your approach is to explicitly use
elements for the tests that need a certain order and exclude them
from the that contains the rest.
I do realize I have this option, but then I'd have to hardcode the
test order in build.xml.
Hi Jacob,
Most of this discussion is on the dev listing.
I can understand your confusion.
A brief history.
(You can search with keyword local at
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=ant-dev&r=1&w=2
to get the full gory details)
When macrodef was written originally, attributes
were (and are) implemente
At 07:03 AM 11/27/2003 -0600, you wrote:
The problem with this is that the property "file.available" cannot be
redefined a second time now because the macrodef lives outside of any target
and so this property resides on top level.
Is this essentially the problem you are facing?
That is exactly th
On Thu, 2003-11-27 at 08:35, Jack J. Woehr wrote:
> Chris Wood wrote:
>
> > It's not my day - this is the second platform I've had trouble with Ant
> > on today...
> >
> > Ok, using ant1.6beta2, on OS/400.
> >
>
> Were you able to build Ant on OS/400? Or did someone give you a precompiled jar?
>
I tried the following three files:
top.xml
second.xml
and
third.xml
spro.classpath is ${spro.classpath}
ant -f top.xml
generates:
doit:
deploy:
all:
[echo] spro.classpath is /home/preilly/learning/ant/classes
On both ant 1.5.3
On Wed, 26 Nov 2003, Jacob Kjome <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 04:00 PM 11/26/2003 +0100, you wrote:
>>One exit path would be without in 1.6 and adding
>> at any later point in time.
>
> So people can ignore the task until 1.7 when it will become
> something more than nearly useless?
There ar
