If you run "ant -projecthelp" you get a listing of our "external" ant targets within the
The ant mechanism in this area isn't very elegant. In the ideal world, <target> would
have an extra attribute such as targetType=internal/external. However, at the moment
the way to make this distinction is via the description attribute - if it exists, the target is
externally visible... otherwise it is not.
Of course, there is nothing to prevent you running ant against an internal target. I'm only
talking about those targets which appear when you run -projecthelp.
I have reviewed my own new targets and categorised them... external targets have a
description attribute and internal targets have an XML comment instead of a
I have the impression that we have too many external targets and would like to make a
few changes. However, I am not familiar enough with their functionality and usefulness
to be sure of the right decisions. Can anyone help?
1. Probably should be internal :- bundle-sip, bundle-slick-runner, bundle-slickless,
2. OK as external now :- clean, make, rebuild, test.
3. Perhaps better to be internal :- compile, extractnativejmf, package.
4. Perhaps better to be external :- cc-buildloop
Emil will have spotted my discomfort with the cc-buildloop and rebuild targets... they
don't do the same thing. I'm also unsure whether it is helpful to update the javadoc
every time. Obviously, our CruiseControl target needs to be our "safety net" by
recreating the project from scratch. I realise developers might find a quicker "rebuild"
target useful, but I'm confused myself and wonder if others might feel the same as me. If
"rebuild" doesn't rebuild everything, perhaps it has the wrong name? If cc-buildloop is
really a "rebuild", why don't we call it rebuild?