| 1 |
Krzysiek Pawlik wrote: |
| 2 |
> Petteri Räty wrote: |
| 3 |
>>> I propose to deprecate ejavac and remove it in gen3 - writting build.xml files |
| 4 |
>>> is very easy, so I don't see any reason why not to do so for few packages still |
| 5 |
>>> using ejavac: |
| 6 |
>> Well is there any compelling reason not to support it? Works fine and |
| 7 |
>> does what it is supposed to. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> IMVHO it's a hack to not write a build.xml, you have to run ejavac, then jar, |
| 10 |
> eventually javadoc - why? Isn't it easier (and less error prone) to do it in |
| 11 |
> build.xml? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I don't agree it's hack. I think it's easier to write few lines in |
| 14 |
ebuild than writing build.xml which needs ant dependency, takes space in |
| 15 |
FILESDIR and in the end does exactly the same thing. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> BTW. you don't have to CC me when replying - I'm reading gentoo-java :) |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
He probably used 'Reply to All' because he's too sexy for |
| 20 |
USE=replytolist with thunderbird :) |
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Vlastimil Babka (Caster) |
| 23 |
Gentoo/Java |
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
gentoo-java@g.o mailing list |
Archives