ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bevan Arps <bevan.a...@actfs.co.nz>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] No need for CLASSPATH in ANT1
Date Wed, 07 Nov 2001 01:25:10 GMT
At 01:08 7/11/2001 +0000, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:

>I feel there is a lot of BCS paranoia on this. Are we talking about tasks that
>are impossible to implement unless Ant classes are loaded from the ClassPath?
>If that were the case, then I could understand the argument, but it seems 
>to me
>a little too much to say that we cannot change anything because the whole
>of the world economy would colapse if we were to do so.

Please go back and read what I wrote again. Then read it again. With a 
dictionary.

I did not in any way say "we cannot change anything because the whole of 
the world economy would colapse" and I strongly resent your statement that 
I did.

You asked why it was the Ant community couldn't make the changes you're 
suggesting and I gave one answer - that there are a lot of tasks that would 
break, particularly tasks that the core Ant team cannot know about.

Now, please read this very carefully: Provided it is done in a way that 
won't surprise Ant users, I have no problem at all with breaking backward 
compatibility.

The key is not surprising them - the worst thing you can do with customers 
is to foist upon them a mandatory change that causes them hassle and 
inconvenience with no apparent benefit to them. In fact, this is the best 
way to lose them.

This is why, IMHO, the changes you have been campaigning so vigorously for 
should NOT be found in any 1.x version but only in 2.x.

As I said, what I am suggesting does not make the code incompatible (you 
can still
>provide the old scripts for this special cases. I would like to introduce 
>some of this
>features sooner, so that people start becomming aware of where we are heading.
>If Peter is right and there will be another year before ANT2, more people 
>will be writing
>more bad tasks and the presure for keeping things as they are will be 
>stronger.

No it won't - because it has always been advertised that Ant2 will break 
existing things.

If Ant 1.6 turns up and suddenly breaks my build, I know I would be 
monumentally pissed off.

If Ant 2.0 breaks my build, well, I knew it was coming so it's no big deal.

Bevan.



--
"Programming is an Art Form that Fights Back"

Bevan Arps (<mailto:bevan.arps@actfs.co.nz>bevan.arps@actfs.co.nz)
Senior OO Analyst, ACT Financial Systems

This communication  is confidential  to ACT  Financial  Systems  (Asia 
Pacific)  and is intended for  use only by the  addressee.   The  views and 
opinions  expressed in  this email  are the senders  own and do not 
represent  the  views  and  opinions of  ACT  Financial  Systems  (Asia 
Pacific).


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message