From stefano@apache.org Fri Apr 7 23:12:13 2000 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 88191 invoked from network); 7 Apr 2000 23:12:13 -0000 Received: from pop.systemy.it (194.20.140.28) by locus.apache.org with SMTP; 7 Apr 2000 23:12:13 -0000 Received: from apache.org (pv15-pri.systemy.it [194.21.255.15]) by pop.systemy.it (8.8.8/8.8.3) with ESMTP id BAA12506 for ; Sat, 8 Apr 2000 01:12:09 +0200 Message-ID: <38EDC1E3.2956E684@apache.org> Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2000 13:09:23 +0200 From: Stefano Mazzocchi Organization: Apache Software Foundation X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; I) X-Accept-Language: it,en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org Subject: Re: I want to become an Ant developer References: <852568B3.0052DFC7.00@d54mta04.raleigh.ibm.com> <003501bfa024$66b3f600$417c9081@ionic> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: locus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N James Duncan Davidson wrote: > > > Everyone sees the potential of Ant to become a pearl, one that will be > > polished smooth by the application of small amounts of friction over a > long > > period of time. > > Actually, the way that it is going, I see it becoming a perl. Able to do too > damn much any which way from Tuesday. Something for everyone, but with build > files that are too cluttered to read by anybody. I understand your frustration but I disagree with what you said.... I created many of the tweaks that make the Cocoon build.xml file hard to understand.... and I know that. But, man, this was driven by need and nobody was here to propose anything better so I coded it... since the addiction s were quite general and useful, I thought others could benefit from it. also, I'm scared to death about placing scripting inside ant... but Sam made it a task, so the core simplicity is preserved. You can build your own simple ant build files and let others do the complex things, if they care. True, there are many improvements to be done, a refactoring of the core could be nice, but evolutionary processes (once again) are much better for a need-driven open project.James Duncan Davidson wrote: > > maybe I just need to unsubscribe from this project... I'm not being of > > any help. > > You and me both. Even though I started this, and have threatened to jump > back in the fold, I've been too damn busy to code anything. :( And it's not > going to change for a while. Same here... I'm going to unsubscribe from this project because I already have everything I possibly need out of Ant and I have less and less bandwidth to share (I'm also leaving the Cocoon2 project coordinator role to Pier)... but I'm leaving with a different feeling, that Sam knows what he's doing and understands our concerns. True, we could find out that "make" started awesome and became a nightmare because of that: continuous functionality addictions.. but Ant is OOP, make is not. Dynamic linking, instrospections and polymorphism is something that allows us to preserve the core. Actually, I consider more dangerous the "init" target than the