ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Ant2 codebase adoption process
Date Thu, 24 Jan 2002 17:21:07 GMT
On Thu, 24 Jan 2002, Peter Donald wrote:

> Mainly because many of the features require backwards incompatible changes
> which are unacceptable in a stable released project that is used as widely as
> ant is. It would be iresponsible of ant-dev to put users through this IMHO.

Are you kiding ??? Ant internals have changed between each 1.x release - I
can hardly recognize things.

But my point was that no change or feature in ant2 justfiy braking
backward compatibility at:
- build.xml level
- basic Task interface and patterns.

If it can't provide backward compat - it's not worth it, regardless of
what fancy features ( needed by 1% of the users ) it adds.

> With ant1.x there is a large effort not to break build files, this sometimes
> is inevitable (ie every addition of a new task could potentially cause
> conflicts) but we try to minimize the inconvenience.

Could you explain this ? Except for adding a task that has the same name
with a user-defined task, there's little else that can happen.

And that can be solved easily by adding namespaces, in a backward
compatible way ( i.e. the default namespace is reserved for ant internal
tasks ).

> > At this point and with the current usage of ant, no 'perfect' design
> > can justify the pain associated with changing the build files and tasks.
> If it was just aesthetics then I would agree but the reason for Ant2 is not
> that - it is to be able to provide functionality people have been begging for
> for ages.

Ant1 works very well - I haven't had almost any 'itch' with it in almost a
year. If some functionality requires breaking build.xml and basic task
patterns - I don't think adding it is the right thing to do.

I hope there are enough commiters to understand the benefits of backward
compat - and -1 such features, but now a whole package is pushed on our
throat as ant2 with backward compat thrown away from start.

I'm very worried that ant2 will 'backdoor' this kind of stuff by changing
the codebase as a 'package' - without people beeing able to analyze each
individual change and decide if it's worth it.

Again - if ant2 can't provide backward compat at build.xml and Task
patterns level, I'll not use it.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message