ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dominique Devienne <DDevie...@lgc.com>
Subject RE: TaskContainer and nested data-types
Date Fri, 08 Nov 2002 19:44:43 GMT
Oh boy, that didn't sound like I'll be able to put a <path> inside an
<if>/<switch> any time soon, didn't it... --DD

-----Original Message-----
From: Costin Manolache [mailto:cmanolache@yahoo.com] 
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 1:30 PM
To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Subject: Re: TaskContainer and nested data-types

Stephane Bailliez wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Stefan Bodewig" <bodewig@apache.org>
> 
> [...]
>> Should data-types be allowed inside TaskContainer?
> 
> I cannot see any reason why they could not. Except enforcing data types
> definition outside for style.

+1.


>> If so, UnknownElement needs to get fixed.
> 
> Houston, we have a problem.
> 
> Recent history shows that we cannot fix something that is possibly wrong
> even though it is are plain incorrect/invalid/counterintituive. Which
> means that if someone is shooting in his foot right now she must continue
> and we must give them unlimited ammos to fulfill her action for the sake
> of backward compatibility. Amen.

I don't agree with this.

History shows that backward compatibility is extremely important, and 
any change should take that into consideration. But we _can_ fix or
change anything. 

A majority vote can decide what happens - make a proposal, add enough
arguments - and if a majority of ant committers believe it's worth 
it - then it'll be done.

Reminder: a code change can be vetoed, and if backward compatibility is
broken I may be the first to veto ( unless I'm making the commit :-)
But if a proposal for a change is voted and gets majority vote - and
the commit just implements the group decision - I don't think a veto
can be valid ( unless it provides a different/better implementation 
for what the community has decided ).

In other words - if Stefan makes this change and committs - anyone can
veto. If a proposal is made and a majority decides this is the best
for ant - than a veto can only propose a better implementation for
what was decided.

If a majority of ant committers don't feel it's a good idea or worth
the pain - then it shouldn't be done.


Costin

> 
> I don't think that myself, and I think nothing is black nor white, what is
> wrong should be fixed to avoid further problems in the future, you'd
> better catch it now than 6 months later. But this is a typical example.
> 
> I know, I'm a PITA :)

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:ant-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message