Re: Gump and Jaxp?

Sam Ruby wrote:
> 
> No, it means that you have something extra: a prebuilt version of ant.  ;-)

Right, good point. I do tend to have those hanging around :-)

In the end, this might be a reasonable approach - the generated scripts 
don't rely on that prebuilt Ant, just the script generation phase. Really, 
it comes down to a maintenance issue (Keeping gen.sh and build.xml's gen 
target in sync). I think I know your preference but for Gump newbies, this 
might be an easier road.

> 
> Works for me on linux, fails on windows.  Here's the -verbose output:
> 
> This doesn't make any sense to me...
> 

OK, path separator is at least one issue. I won't have access to a windows 
box for another week (I'm on leave at the moment - hooray) so I'll try to 
sort it out then.

 >
 > I sure hope that gump's build.xml doesn't ever rely on new features that
 > are added to ant...
 >
> 
> ... cool!  And since I always bootstrap and then use the latest version 
> of ant, this won't cause me any problems.  ;-)
> 

It seems as if the above two statements (which I have juxtaposed) are 
contradictory. Is it OK for Gump's build.xml to use unreleased Ant features?

Conor