You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@harmony.apache.org by Nathan Beyer <nd...@apache.org> on 2008/03/30 03:45:50 UTC
ant version support
There seem to be all sorts of quirks between Ant v1.6.5 and Ant
v1.7.0. The most recent I just ran into was the DRLVM cunit tests
failing because of the use of 'refid' instead of 'id' in the
'includepath' element [1].
Since v1.7 has been out for quite a while now and most unix and linux
variants are shipping that version as the default, I'd like to suggest
that we move to v1.7 as the officially supported version. This would
essentially be updating all doc (web site, readmes, etc) and perhaps a
minor code pause to facilitate the switch.
thoughts?
-Nathan
[1] https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=416920&aid=1626443&group_id=36177
Re: ant version support
Posted by Andrey Pavlenko <an...@googlemail.com>.
+1
On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 5:45 AM, Nathan Beyer <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
> There seem to be all sorts of quirks between Ant v1.6.5 and Ant
> v1.7.0. The most recent I just ran into was the DRLVM cunit tests
> failing because of the use of 'refid' instead of 'id' in the
> 'includepath' element [1].
>
> Since v1.7 has been out for quite a while now and most unix and linux
> variants are shipping that version as the default, I'd like to suggest
> that we move to v1.7 as the officially supported version. This would
> essentially be updating all doc (web site, readmes, etc) and perhaps a
> minor code pause to facilitate the switch.
>
> thoughts?
>
> -Nathan
>
> [1]
> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=416920&aid=1626443&group_id=36177
>
Re: ant version support
Posted by Egor Pasko <eg...@gmail.com>.
On the 0x417 day of Apache Harmony Nathan Beyer wrote:
> There seem to be all sorts of quirks between Ant v1.6.5 and Ant
> v1.7.0. The most recent I just ran into was the DRLVM cunit tests
> failing because of the use of 'refid' instead of 'id' in the
> 'includepath' element [1].
>
> Since v1.7 has been out for quite a while now and most unix and linux
> variants are shipping that version as the default, I'd like to suggest
> that we move to v1.7 as the officially supported version. This would
> essentially be updating all doc (web site, readmes, etc) and perhaps a
> minor code pause to facilitate the switch.
>
> thoughts?
+1!
> -Nathan
>
> [1] https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=416920&aid=1626443&group_id=36177
>
--
Egor Pasko
Re: ant version support
Posted by Gregory Shimansky <gs...@apache.org>.
On 30 марта 2008 Nathan Beyer wrote:
> There seem to be all sorts of quirks between Ant v1.6.5 and Ant
> v1.7.0. The most recent I just ran into was the DRLVM cunit tests
> failing because of the use of 'refid' instead of 'id' in the
> 'includepath' element [1].
>
> Since v1.7 has been out for quite a while now and most unix and linux
> variants are shipping that version as the default, I'd like to suggest
> that we move to v1.7 as the officially supported version. This would
> essentially be updating all doc (web site, readmes, etc) and perhaps a
> minor code pause to facilitate the switch.
>
> thoughts?
+1
I've been using a custom Ant location since I had to copy junit and ecj there.
Now that I learned about ~/.ant/lib I am going to use system default Ant
installation and it is 1.7.0 on most systems indeed.
--
Gregory
Re: ant version support
Posted by Nathan Beyer <nd...@apache.org>.
It has been a few since we chatted about this. Is there anything holding
back formal push to Ant 1.7.0? Last time I checked it was only DRLVM's build
that had any issues with Ant 1.7.0, so that build will begin to not work on
1.6.5.
I'd like to put a version check in the scripts eventually, just to make it
obvious, but that can be discussed further.
-Nathan
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 8:48 AM, Nathan Beyer <nb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 12:36 AM, Stepan Mishura
> <st...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 3/31/08, Nathan Beyer <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > If there is enough support, we can add something like this to the
> > > top-level scripts to give notice -
> > >
> > > <target name="ant-version-check" description="ant version check">
> > > <fail message="You must use Ant 1.7.0">
> > > <condition>
> > > <not>
> > > <contains string="${ant.version}" substring="1.7.0"/>
> > > </not>
> > > </condition>
> > > </fail>
> > > </target>
> > >
> >
> > Our BTI scripts was not tested with v1.7. So I'm 100% not sure that
> > moving to the new ANT's version will be smooth. Also currently I'm
> > refactoring the scripts and need some to test them with ANT 1.7. Is
> > it possible to wait with the change and let me to complete refactoring
> > and testing with 1.7? (I do hope to complete refactoring this week,
> > and for testing I need ~ 1-2 days). Does this work for you?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Stepan.
>
> Sure, that's fine. Let me know when you're ready. I'll go ahead and
> start updating doc in preparation.
>
> -Nathan
> >
> >
> >
> > > -Nathan
> > >
> > > On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 8:45 PM, Nathan Beyer <nd...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > There seem to be all sorts of quirks between Ant v1.6.5 and Ant
> > > > v1.7.0. The most recent I just ran into was the DRLVM cunit tests
> > > > failing because of the use of 'refid' instead of 'id' in the
> > > > 'includepath' element [1].
> > > >
> > > > Since v1.7 has been out for quite a while now and most unix and
> linux
> > > > variants are shipping that version as the default, I'd like to
> suggest
> > > > that we move to v1.7 as the officially supported version. This
> would
> > > > essentially be updating all doc (web site, readmes, etc) and
> perhaps a
> > > > minor code pause to facilitate the switch.
> > > >
> > > > thoughts?
> > > >
> > > > -Nathan
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=416920&aid=1626443&group_id=36177
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: ant version support
Posted by Nathan Beyer <nb...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 12:36 AM, Stepan Mishura
<st...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/31/08, Nathan Beyer <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
> > If there is enough support, we can add something like this to the
> > top-level scripts to give notice -
> >
> > <target name="ant-version-check" description="ant version check">
> > <fail message="You must use Ant 1.7.0">
> > <condition>
> > <not>
> > <contains string="${ant.version}" substring="1.7.0"/>
> > </not>
> > </condition>
> > </fail>
> > </target>
> >
>
> Our BTI scripts was not tested with v1.7. So I'm 100% not sure that
> moving to the new ANT's version will be smooth. Also currently I'm
> refactoring the scripts and need some to test them with ANT 1.7. Is
> it possible to wait with the change and let me to complete refactoring
> and testing with 1.7? (I do hope to complete refactoring this week,
> and for testing I need ~ 1-2 days). Does this work for you?
>
> Thanks,
> Stepan.
Sure, that's fine. Let me know when you're ready. I'll go ahead and
start updating doc in preparation.
-Nathan
>
>
>
> > -Nathan
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 8:45 PM, Nathan Beyer <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > There seem to be all sorts of quirks between Ant v1.6.5 and Ant
> > > v1.7.0. The most recent I just ran into was the DRLVM cunit tests
> > > failing because of the use of 'refid' instead of 'id' in the
> > > 'includepath' element [1].
> > >
> > > Since v1.7 has been out for quite a while now and most unix and linux
> > > variants are shipping that version as the default, I'd like to suggest
> > > that we move to v1.7 as the officially supported version. This would
> > > essentially be updating all doc (web site, readmes, etc) and perhaps a
> > > minor code pause to facilitate the switch.
> > >
> > > thoughts?
> > >
> > > -Nathan
> > >
> > > [1] https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=416920&aid=1626443&group_id=36177
> > >
> >
>
Re: ant version support
Posted by Stepan Mishura <st...@gmail.com>.
On 3/31/08, Nathan Beyer <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
> If there is enough support, we can add something like this to the
> top-level scripts to give notice -
>
> <target name="ant-version-check" description="ant version check">
> <fail message="You must use Ant 1.7.0">
> <condition>
> <not>
> <contains string="${ant.version}" substring="1.7.0"/>
> </not>
> </condition>
> </fail>
> </target>
>
Our BTI scripts was not tested with v1.7. So I'm 100% not sure that
moving to the new ANT's version will be smooth. Also currently I'm
refactoring the scripts and need some to test them with ANT 1.7. Is
it possible to wait with the change and let me to complete refactoring
and testing with 1.7? (I do hope to complete refactoring this week,
and for testing I need ~ 1-2 days). Does this work for you?
Thanks,
Stepan.
> -Nathan
>
> On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 8:45 PM, Nathan Beyer <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
> > There seem to be all sorts of quirks between Ant v1.6.5 and Ant
> > v1.7.0. The most recent I just ran into was the DRLVM cunit tests
> > failing because of the use of 'refid' instead of 'id' in the
> > 'includepath' element [1].
> >
> > Since v1.7 has been out for quite a while now and most unix and linux
> > variants are shipping that version as the default, I'd like to suggest
> > that we move to v1.7 as the officially supported version. This would
> > essentially be updating all doc (web site, readmes, etc) and perhaps a
> > minor code pause to facilitate the switch.
> >
> > thoughts?
> >
> > -Nathan
> >
> > [1] https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=416920&aid=1626443&group_id=36177
> >
>
Re: ant version support
Posted by Nathan Beyer <nd...@apache.org>.
If there is enough support, we can add something like this to the
top-level scripts to give notice -
<target name="ant-version-check" description="ant version check">
<fail message="You must use Ant 1.7.0">
<condition>
<not>
<contains string="${ant.version}" substring="1.7.0"/>
</not>
</condition>
</fail>
</target>
-Nathan
On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 8:45 PM, Nathan Beyer <nd...@apache.org> wrote:
> There seem to be all sorts of quirks between Ant v1.6.5 and Ant
> v1.7.0. The most recent I just ran into was the DRLVM cunit tests
> failing because of the use of 'refid' instead of 'id' in the
> 'includepath' element [1].
>
> Since v1.7 has been out for quite a while now and most unix and linux
> variants are shipping that version as the default, I'd like to suggest
> that we move to v1.7 as the officially supported version. This would
> essentially be updating all doc (web site, readmes, etc) and perhaps a
> minor code pause to facilitate the switch.
>
> thoughts?
>
> -Nathan
>
> [1] https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=416920&aid=1626443&group_id=36177
>
Re: ant version support
Posted by Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>.
Nathan Beyer wrote:
> There seem to be all sorts of quirks between Ant v1.6.5 and Ant
> v1.7.0. The most recent I just ran into was the DRLVM cunit tests
> failing because of the use of 'refid' instead of 'id' in the
> 'includepath' element [1].
>
> Since v1.7 has been out for quite a while now and most unix and linux
> variants are shipping that version as the default, I'd like to suggest
> that we move to v1.7 as the officially supported version. This would
> essentially be updating all doc (web site, readmes, etc) and perhaps a
> minor code pause to facilitate the switch.
>
> thoughts?
+1
I've been using Ant 1.7 for quite a while and had no problem (obviously
not run the DRLVM cunit tests tho')
Regards,
Tim
> -Nathan
>
> [1] https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=416920&aid=1626443&group_id=36177
>