Fine with me. I never even plan on using the ANT script anyway...just
trying to make it easier for you to document.
If it were me, I'd prefer a fail message telling me to set JBOSS_HOME
and just handle everything with OS variables and not even have a
properties file to edit. I always think of properties files as
environment-specific constants and not dynamic values. If the user
despises setting an OS environment variable and likes editing files, I'd
guess they're probably just fine editing build.xml or
local.build.properties instead of build.properties.
I don't really have much of an opinion on the subject. I'll apply your
suggestions and then maybe the ant strategy should be architected by an
actual ANT user.
On 12/09/2009 04:04 PM, Dan Allen wrote:
I think the point is that the build.properties file should just be
defaulting to the system property, encouraging the user to control
the value that way (no meddling required).
It's also clearer for seasoned Ant users since they are going to look
in build.properties first, and they will get what we are trying to do.
-Dan
--
Dan Allen
Senior Software Engineer, Red Hat | Author of Seam in Action
Registered Linux User #231597
http://mojavelinux.com
http://mojavelinux.com/seaminaction
http://www.google.com/profiles/dan.j.allen