ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ken Wood <>
Subject Re: Request: Change <javac> debug default to "on"
Date Tue, 05 Nov 2002 22:24:19 GMT
Rather than debate it, why not ask the folks
on ant-users list to vote for or against the proposed
change in default behavior?

Us developers are notorious for thinking we know
what the user wants... and being wrong. Why spend
days debating the merits of changing the default when
we can ask the users how they feel?

Personally, I don't put much merit to any argument that
says we can't make a change because build files would
have to change.

Every time I switch to a new version of Ant, I'm switching
to take advantage of some new capability. So, I gotta
change my build files anyhow. I just don't buy the 'build
files' argument...

Joseph Dane wrote:

> "Magesh Umasankar" <> writes:
> > A change to the existing behavior of <javac> practically
> > means a rewrite of *every* ant build file out there.
> Well, maybe if "every" is defined to mean "every buildfile except
> mine", since I do not personally rely on the default behavior, and I
> don't see how this change would force me to change my buildfiles.
> > By making this change, we are forcing every build file
> > to be rewritten to retain existing, and in most cases,
> > accepted behavior, when an ant upgrade is made.
> Again, "every"?
> It has already been demonstrated the javac task *has* changed in
> previous releases of Ant.  Where was the widespread confusion and
> panic?
> > How is its effectiveness reduced? You can still
> > configure it the way you want it to behave - just
> > because you don't like the default doesn't make it
> > any less effective.
> Not to me personally, since I don't rely on the defaults.  But the
> intent behind the proposal, at least as I understood it, was to reduce
> confusion in *new* projects and users.  I can absoluetly see the
> benefit to this population, and I can't see how they are being served
> by a decision to retain the status quo.
> It all boils down to cost/benefit.  Clearly, I understated the cost
> with my initial "no brainer" response, but I still think that the
> benefit to the Ant user population (present and future) outweighs the
> cost.
> Anyhow, that's my 2c.
> --
> joe
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <>

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

View raw message