You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@ant.apache.org by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@bost.de> on 2000/09/05 17:17:41 UTC

Should we drop the nested *ref elements?

If we add refid attributes to FileSet and PatternSet as well, these
could be superfluos, for example

     <chmod perm="+x">
       <fileset dir="${bin.dir}">
         <patternsetref refid="chmod.patterns"/>
       </fileset>
     </chmod>

could as well be written as

     <chmod perm="+x">
       <fileset dir="${bin.dir}">
         <patternset refid="chmod.patterns"/>
       </fileset>
     </chmod>

This might even be easier to read.

Some tasks would need to be changed but given that these things are
quite new I don't fear to break anything. Comments?

Stefan

Re: Should we drop the nested *ref elements?

Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@bost.de>.

>>>>> "CM" == Conor MacNeill <co...@m64.com> writes:

 CM> +1 for me.

OK, I'll go for it as soon as I can find some time.

Stefan

RE: Should we drop the nested *ref elements?

Posted by Conor MacNeill <co...@m64.com>.

> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@bost.de]
> Sent: Wednesday, 6 September 2000 2:18
> To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: Should we drop the nested *ref elements?
> 
> 
> If we add refid attributes to FileSet and PatternSet as well, these
> could be superfluos, for example
> 
>      <chmod perm="+x">
>        <fileset dir="${bin.dir}">
>          <patternsetref refid="chmod.patterns"/>
>        </fileset>
>      </chmod>
> 
> could as well be written as
> 
>      <chmod perm="+x">
>        <fileset dir="${bin.dir}">
>          <patternset refid="chmod.patterns"/>
>        </fileset>
>      </chmod>
> 
> This might even be easier to read.
> 
> Some tasks would need to be changed but given that these things are
> quite new I don't fear to break anything. Comments?

+1 for me.

Conor