ant-ivy-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mitch Gitman <>
Subject Re: Please vote: changing the default conflict manager
Date Fri, 24 Sep 2010 14:32:38 GMT
Well, I'm kinda shifting from "opposed" to "open to it." The more I think
about it, the more I can see that Archie's use case isn't a case of Ivy
being overly helpful.

But Archie, can you or anyone else articulate in your own words the rules of
latest-compatible? The current brief description in the documentation can be
interpreted to mean anything. I would find it troubling if the maintainers
of an open-source framework are moving to a different default behavior, and
no one can put in plain English what that default behavior does.

On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 7:13 AM, Archie Cobbs <> wrote:

> The assumption that any revision greater than 1.0 will automatically be
> backward compatible with 1.0 is in my opinion just plain crazy and wrong.
> Software changes all the time and things are constantly being broken by
> incompatible changes. Most projects in fact have an explicit policy to this
> effect, saying for example that any change in the major version number
> signifies an incompatible change in the API, etc.
> Moreover, this becomes more and more true as a project's dependency tree
> gets bigger and more complicated -- exactly the situations where you need
> ivy the most.
> Finally, if what you want to say is "anything revision 1.0 or later" then
> we
> have the syntax rev="[1.0,)" for that purpose. Having rev="1.0" mean the
> same thing is totally counter-intuitive.

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message