Re: Ant installation (and other) issues!

Seems like the debate has flared again.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Gunnar Rønning" <gunnar(at)polygnosis(dot)com>
Cc: "Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>; "Per-Olof Norén" <pelle(at)alma(dot)nu>;
<pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 1:22 AM
Subject: Re: [JDBC] Ant installation (and other) issues!

> Gunnar =?iso-8859-1?q?R=F8nning?= <gunnar(at)polygnosis(dot)com> writes:
> > But anyway this off topic, what need to have is a build process that
works
> > nicely and I think including the ant binaries(around 500k) would be the
> > best solution here.
>
> 500k of binaries? You just lost the argument. That's not an acceptable
> amount of overhead to add to the Postgres distribution.

I don´t see why the size of ant will be a problem. Could you please explain
to me?