Krzysiek Pawlik wrote:
> Petteri Räty wrote:
>>> I propose to deprecate ejavac and remove it in gen3 - writting build.xml files
>>> is very easy, so I don't see any reason why not to do so for few packages still
>>> using ejavac:
>> Well is there any compelling reason not to support it? Works fine and
>> does what it is supposed to.
> 
> IMVHO it's a hack to not write a build.xml, you have to run ejavac, then jar,
> eventually javadoc - why? Isn't it easier (and less error prone) to do it in
> build.xml?

I don't agree it's hack. I think it's easier to write few lines in 
ebuild than writing build.xml which needs ant dependency, takes space in 
FILESDIR and in the end does exactly the same thing.

> BTW. you don't have to CC me when replying - I'm reading gentoo-java :)

He probably used 'Reply to All' because he's too sexy for 
USE=replytolist with thunderbird :)
-- 
Vlastimil Babka (Caster)
Gentoo/Java
-- 
gentoo-java@g.o mailing list