I am not a commiter, but I completely agreed with Peter on this one. 8-o This is a very substantial change, and as it has been stressed before anything we add to the API gets set in stone and we are stuck with it for the whole of ANT1īs life. Some comments below: --- Magesh Umasankar wrote: > > ok, but I understood you OKed some sort of a > wrapper. I can back them out, > of course, if you are giving a -1 to this > implementation (I understand you > are > from what I read, but please confirm). If you had > provided these comments > earlier, it might have helped too. > I think it is dificult to understand completely the consequences of some of this proposals, just by reading one e-mail account of it. That is why it is a good idea to submit this things as proposals, and make all the changes to tasks there so one can understand the settle implications of things. For example, I had a real problem with the consequences of this change on . The fact that an input file had to be managed as if it where an output file just to shortcut the validation, tell me that we have a problem. I cannot believe this will be the only place ever were we will have such a situation. It is a very small issue, which one cannot grasp just by reading your explanatory message, but it rises a red flag, at least to me. > > > The concept of validation here is somewhat > similar to > EnumeratedAttribute. > > > > Type and validation of type are different concepts > and shouldn't be merged > > together. There should be a method that allows > validation to be extracted > > EnumeratedAttribute, IIRC, performs validation > also... > This to me is just syntactic validation and would be equivalent to verifying that the string being passed corresponds to a valid filename, whether it exists or not. This is what (I think) File(String) will (or should) do. > > Heres one way of "fixing" this - maybe to wait > till Ant2. Please, do not add new APIs which we already believe are broken or wrong. This is a problem we have had several times, someone adds some new idea with the best of intentions, there is little review or discussion because the person has committing rights, and then there is no way out of it when problems arise. The commiters put a very high bar for non committers to get anything in, lots of discussions and -1s. But I do not perceive the same level of discussions when other committers make important changes. As I said, everyone is working with the best intensions in mind, but no one can forsee all the consequences of some changes. Jose Alberto __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: