ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jose Alberto Fernandez" <>
Subject Re: Speaking of deprecation...
Date Sat, 09 Feb 2002 20:40:12 GMT
From: <>

> On Sat, 9 Feb 2002, Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
> > I think we are loosing sight of why the deprecation message is there.
> >
> >
> > If people dislike the message, the easiest way to remove it is to FIX YOUR BUILD
> > or your old tasks.
> I DON'T WANT TO UPGRADE THE BUILDFILE, and certainly not to be forced
> to do that.

I am just saying that that was the original aim of those messages. 
We should reevaluate what we were trying to accomplish or live it alone.
Far too many times we start in one direccion and then all of the sudden we change without
proper awarness of it, and two month later, there we go again with "wait a minute"s and
"I thought we were suppose to"s ... and so on.

> - you can write a makefile for a 10 year old make and it'll work with any
> newer make. I don't have to upgrade my makefile with every release of gnu
> make.

Of course 95% of your make file is not make related at all, but BourneShell.
This is where ANT and MAKE took very different paths try to run that same 
file in some other version of the OS or different machine and you will see.
There are reasons why auto-configure and all that was invented.

> - you can write a html page that displays in netscape2.0. People don't
> have to upgrade their pages every for every new browser.

Totally true, although XHTML comes to mind as trying to break with that :-)

> - you can write a shell script that works with any version of bourne
> shell in the last 10 years.

It may be the case, but every time I go into a different version of UNIX I find myself
with a new dialect all the time.

> - same for java - most programs that work on JDK1.1 will still work ( even
> without recompilation ) on JDK1.4.
> Of course, each of this has exceptions - Thread.stop() -like ( i.e. a very
> serious bug that is too dangerous to support ) or bugs or mistakes you
> may have to work around. But in 99% of the cases it'll work.
> I use deprecated features ( or things that have 'modern' replacements )
> because I choose to, not because I'm stupid and need to be told
> that every time I build.
Ok, can you explain the reason you have to do this? I would just like to understand
did you have a trouble childhood? ;-)

No seriously, it is there a good reason that compels you to do that or just trying not to

Jose Alberto

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

View raw message