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