RFC: ant 1.6.3

[Wolfgang Baer]

Arnaud Vandyck wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Wed, 27 Apr 2005 14:38:26 +0200, 
> Wolfgang Baer <WBaer@gmx.de> wrote: 
> 
>>The question was packaging as an update to libant1.6 *after* sarge
>>release or if we should packaging it as an new upstream release of
>>libant1.6 AT ALL (because of the existing breaking changes) !
> 
> 
> I understood that too ;-)

OK :-)

> Maybe libant1.6.3 could be a good idea because of the breackage, but I'd
> like to have some more feedbacks because I'd prefer to keep
> libant1.6. Are these changes very importants? The sub ant task could
> break things, I don't think the tar thing is bad, nor the Reference in
> object, nor the addition in the junit task, nor the additions in jikes
> compiler adapter (for references, Wolfgang listed the changes here:
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-java-maintainers/2005-April/003244.html)...
> 
> Am I wrong? Is the only 'stopper' could be the subant task? and if it's
> the only stopper, should we ignore it?

The additions in jikes can also break existing builds if there are
bootclasspath elements in a javac task. Until now libraries in this
element are added just to the classpath - with 1.6.3 they would take
precedence over the runtime libraries.

But I don't think this will affect many packages - atm I am only aware
that libxalan2-java uses this. But that is no problem - it is what I
need to built libxalan2-java with the current free runtimes !

Wolfgang