Talk:Apache Ant

message: The rm example in the part about make's non-portability
is a bit unfortunate — GNU make and other makes provide $(RM),
so it becomes make's, not the users, problem to find a suitable
tool for deleting stuff. I never invoke rm(1) directly in my files
(but tend to have other, less general things invoked by make).
JöG 19:12, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: make and rm

message: This ant task has the same name as the common java command-line utility, but is really a call to the ant program's predefined library. Most likely, this function in turn then calls the command-line utility behind the scenes, as is true of many of ant's tasks.
What does that even mean? Either it does or it does not make a call to the CLI. Since it is open source, it should be possible to clarify this point.82.10.159.229 22:13, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It means whoever wrote the para didn't look in the source, or ask the dev team. Ant has its own zip file classes that we think are better than Sun's as they can read and write the unix file permissions, and handle duplicate entries. Fixed the paragraph and added some examples where Ant really does call out. Note that some tasks, i.e <javac> can call libraries in-VM <javac compiler="modern" />, <javac compiler="modern" />, external java program <javac compiler="extJavac" />, or external native app <javac compiler="gcj" />. There's a helper class for every compiler that sets up the appropriate program, so developers can switch just by naming a different compiler. SteveLoughran 21:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Weasel

message: Is it retrieved manually or automatically?
According to http://ant.apache.org it is "1.8.0" and it was released "February 8, 2010".
--Volphy (talk) 14:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: How is the latest stable release retrieved?

message: It would be nice if the Ant release history would be documented here, like
* Ant 1.1 was release on date …
* …
* Ant 1.8.2 was released on date …
* Ant 1.9.0 was released on date …
* Ant 1.9.1 was released on date …
* Ant 1.9.2 was released on date …
* etc.
Ernstdehaan (talk) 08:48, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release History 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Apache Ant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090108131210/http://www.objectstyle.org/confluence/display/WOL/WOProject-Ant to http://www.objectstyle.org/confluence/display/WOL/WOProject-Ant
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:41, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello.
There is a big problem with the word "cross-platform"; it is a weasel word. I have said a lot before, but I would like to impress upon everyone here how grave the problem is. Weasel words give zero information because their description is so broadly correct that you might as well not have that description.
Virtually, you can pick any computer program and call it cross-platform. For example:
* Most Android apps are written using Java for Android VM. In that sense, they are uniplatform. But you can claim they are cross-platform because they run on both ARM and x86.
* Most 32-bit Windows apps are written against Windows API. In that sense, they are uniplatform. But you can claim they are cross-platform because they run on IA-32 and x64 CPUs. In reality, Windows Server might not run them, if its WoW64 subsystem is not installed.
* Most Java SE apps can be claimed to be cross-platform because the Java SE runtime is available for Windows, macOS and Linux. But in reality, they are written against one platform alone.
Calling a program "cross-platform" is one problem, inserting it into the  field of the infobox is another. There is no operating system called "cross-platform". And if a program is written for Java SE 9, it does not run on Windows XP. So, inserting it into the  field of the infobox isn't just giving zero information; it is also giving potentially wrong information. Add the fact that there are no binary versions of Apache Ant. (I checked, but please correct me if I am wrong.) That means running it on Windows is a Herculean task of its own merit; not every nine-year-old kid could do it.
Finally, there is one matter. I only wrote this thread, because I felt obliged to respond to an act of good faith in kind. In revision 818096430, 2600:1005:b04a:9f8:e005:aef6:666a:aad7 went an extra mile to provide a source for the cross-platform claim. So, I felt obliged to write this. However Wikipedia requires everything written to have a source, but does write not everything that a given source says. We have other requirements too. (I was talking about one all along: WP:WTA.) Also, I did check the IP address's geolocation data. I am not saying more right now, except that if the IP editor plays fair, I will play fair. (Hint: A blanket revert that brings back four typos and causes inconsistency isn't exactly playing fair.)
Best regards,Codename Lisa (talk) 16:43, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cross-platform ... again