You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ant.apache.org by bo...@locus.apache.org on 2000/09/04 15:29:51 UTC

cvs commit: jakarta-ant/src/main/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs Property.java

bodewig     00/09/04 06:29:50

  Modified:    src/main/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs Property.java
  Log:
  Reverting part of my last patch. This one slipped through somehow, too
  early to go that far, sorry.
  
  Revision  Changes    Path
  1.14      +1 -1      jakarta-ant/src/main/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs/Property.java
  
  Index: Property.java
  ===================================================================
  RCS file: /home/cvs/jakarta-ant/src/main/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs/Property.java,v
  retrieving revision 1.13
  retrieving revision 1.14
  diff -u -r1.13 -r1.14
  --- Property.java	2000/09/04 13:19:54	1.13
  +++ Property.java	2000/09/04 13:29:50	1.14
  @@ -107,7 +107,7 @@
           return resource;
       }
   
  -    public void execute() throws BuildException {
  +    public void init() throws BuildException {
           try {
               if ((name != null) && (value != null)) {
                   addProperty(name, value);
  
  
  

Re: cvs commit: jakarta-ant/src/main/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs Property.java

Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@bost.de>.
>>>>> "NS" == Nico Seessle <ni...@seessle.de> writes:

 NS> Maybe <tstamp> should be changed in the same way if the time is
 NS> coming?

As well as <filter> and <available>, yes.

Stefan

Re: cvs commit: jakarta-ant/src/main/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs Property.java

Posted by Nico Seessle <ni...@seessle.de>.
----- Original Message -----
From: <bo...@locus.apache.org>
To: <ja...@apache.org>
Sent: Monday, September 04, 2000 3:29 PM
Subject: cvs commit: jakarta-ant/src/main/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs
Property.java


> bodewig     00/09/04 06:29:50
>
>   Modified:    src/main/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs Property.java
>   Log:
>   Reverting part of my last patch. This one slipped through somehow, too
>   early to go that far, sorry.
>

Maybe <tstamp> should be changed in the same way if the time is coming? Just
for completeness, since it's generally inside of an init-target and also
"executing" at parse-time.

Nico