remove ant from ofbiz

[hans_bakker]

Hi community,

the version of Ant distributed with ofbiz is pretty old and has some
disadvantages:
1. does not support the failonerror="true" on te <patch command
2. difficult command line when using apply-ofbiz-patches:
     ../../ant apply-ofbiz-patches

i tested using the ant version 1.8.2 and it seems to work fine.....

why not remove it and use the standard ant install?
could still have the ant command to redirect to the external ant

opinions please?

regards,
Hans

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

Hi Hans,

what I don't like is that this will add a new system requirement for the user.
Why not upgrading the embedded version instead?

Jacopo

On Dec 22, 2011, at 4:23 AM, Hans Bakker wrote:

> Hi community,
>
> the version of Ant distributed with ofbiz is pretty old and has some disadvantages:
> 1. does not support the failonerror="true" on te <patch command
> 2. difficult command line when using apply-ofbiz-patches:
>    ../../ant apply-ofbiz-patches
>
> i tested using the ant version 1.8.2 and it seems to work fine.....
>
> why not remove it and use the standard ant install?
> could still have the ant command to redirect to the external ant
>
> opinions please?
>
> regards,
> Hans

[hans_bakker]

Looks like the best way also because Ubuntu 10.04 LTS by default
installs ant 1.7 while 1.8 is needed.
Lets see what we can do here....
Hans

On 12/22/2011 01:22 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:

> Hi Hans,
>
> what I don't like is that this will add a new system requirement for the user.
> Why not upgrading the embedded version instead?
>
> Jacopo
>
> On Dec 22, 2011, at 4:23 AM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>
>> Hi community,
>>
>> the version of Ant distributed with ofbiz is pretty old and has some disadvantages:
>> 1. does not support the failonerror="true" on te<patch command
>> 2. difficult command line when using apply-ofbiz-patches:
>>     ../../ant apply-ofbiz-patches
>>
>> i tested using the ant version 1.8.2 and it seems to work fine.....
>>
>> why not remove it and use the standard ant install?
>> could still have the ant command to redirect to the external ant
>>
>> opinions please?
>>
>> regards,
>> Hans

[Jacques Le Roux]

+1

Jacques

From: "Jacopo Cappellato" <[hidden email]>

> Hi Hans,
>
> what I don't like is that this will add a new system requirement for the user.
> Why not upgrading the embedded version instead?
>
> Jacopo
>
> On Dec 22, 2011, at 4:23 AM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>
>> Hi community,
>>
>> the version of Ant distributed with ofbiz is pretty old and has some disadvantages:
>> 1. does not support the failonerror="true" on te <patch command
>> 2. difficult command line when using apply-ofbiz-patches:
>>    ../../ant apply-ofbiz-patches
>>
>> i tested using the ant version 1.8.2 and it seems to work fine.....
>>
>> why not remove it and use the standard ant install?
>> could still have the ant command to redirect to the external ant
>>
>> opinions please?
>>
>> regards,
>> Hans
>
>

[Sascha Rodekamp-3]

I would also prefer to add upgrade the embedded version. That make it
much easier for the user, he haven't to deal with a local ant
installation, that properly causes compatibility issues if the wrong
ant version is installed on the user machine...

But +1 for upgrading!

2011/12/22 Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]>:

> +1
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "Jacopo Cappellato" <[hidden email]>
>
>> Hi Hans,
>>
>> what I don't like is that this will add a new system requirement for the
>> user.
>> Why not upgrading the embedded version instead?
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
>> On Dec 22, 2011, at 4:23 AM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>
>>> Hi community,
>>>
>>> the version of Ant distributed with ofbiz is pretty old and has some
>>> disadvantages:
>>> 1. does not support the failonerror="true" on te <patch command
>>> 2. difficult command line when using apply-ofbiz-patches:
>>>   ../../ant apply-ofbiz-patches
>>>
>>> i tested using the ant version 1.8.2 and it seems to work fine.....
>>>
>>> why not remove it and use the standard ant install?
>>> could still have the ant command to redirect to the external ant
>>>
>>> opinions please?
>>>
>>> regards,
>>> Hans
>>
>>
>>
>

--

Sascha Rodekamp
    Visit the new german OFBiz Blog: http://www.ofbiz.biz
    Lynx-Consulting GmbH
    Johanniskirchplatz 6
    D-33615 Bielefeld
    http://www.lynx.de

[hans_bakker]

You and others: you got it, upgraded today,

Regards Hans and employees of antwebsystems.


On 12/23/2011 03:41 PM, Sascha Rodekamp wrote:

> I would also prefer to add upgrade the embedded version. That make it
> much easier for the user, he haven't to deal with a local ant
> installation, that properly causes compatibility issues if the wrong
> ant version is installed on the user machine...
>
> But +1 for upgrading!
>
> 2011/12/22 Jacques Le Roux<[hidden email]>:
>> +1
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>> From: "Jacopo Cappellato"<[hidden email]>
>>
>>> Hi Hans,
>>>
>>> what I don't like is that this will add a new system requirement for the
>>> user.
>>> Why not upgrading the embedded version instead?
>>>
>>> Jacopo
>>>
>>> On Dec 22, 2011, at 4:23 AM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi community,
>>>>
>>>> the version of Ant distributed with ofbiz is pretty old and has some
>>>> disadvantages:
>>>> 1. does not support the failonerror="true" on te<patch command
>>>> 2. difficult command line when using apply-ofbiz-patches:
>>>>    ../../ant apply-ofbiz-patches
>>>>
>>>> i tested using the ant version 1.8.2 and it seems to work fine.....
>>>>
>>>> why not remove it and use the standard ant install?
>>>> could still have the ant command to redirect to the external ant
>>>>
>>>> opinions please?
>>>>
>>>> regards,
>>>> Hans
>>>
>>>
>
>