Okay, now I understand, at least a little. It would seem that, if A depends on B, using a part of B’s implementation that, say, returns an object of type C, then modifying C doesn’t cause the depend task to rebuild A unless you set closure to be true. Which is a little weird – I would think of that as being enough to cause A to depend directly on C.
So that’s why, without setting closure to be true, you don’t get the right stuff rebuilt. Having said that, closure also causes tons of extra stuff to be rebuilt – why not use a more useful notion of dependency to begin with? Does it have something to do with the structure of class files? What is the notion of dependency that the task is working with?
There are no revisions for this post.