lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Smiley, David W." <>
Subject Re: Ant version for building Solr
Date Mon, 23 Apr 2012 14:37:58 GMT
I understand your point Rob.  But given your point of view, wouldn't it be sufficient for the
README to simply say "download Ant 1.7 and…" without explicitly telling the user *not* to
use Ant 1.8, which is suggestive of a particular problem with the newer version?  You didn't
tell them *not* to use Ant 1.9 yet either ;-) or… etc.  It goes without saying when I read
any instructions that references a particular version that that particular version works,
and that there is no guarantee of anything else.

Is there anything preventing Ant 1.8 being the release we advise people to use?  After all,
Ant 1.8 was already on my Mac after I had grabbed dev tools extras; I'm not sure when I last
explicitly installed it.

JUnit and any other library is a non-issue since the build refers to particular versions.

~ David

On Apr 23, 2012, at 9:02 AM, Robert Muir wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Robert Muir <> wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 8:49 AM, Michael McCandless
>> <> wrote:
>>> I agree whenever we say "not version XXX" we ought to provide details
>>> of why (and/or link to the Jira issue).
> Finally, at least the junit problems were because in newer releases,
> junit backwards-broke some apis.
> At any time, junit could do this again, and so could ant, if they like.
> So I don't see how there can be a jira issue predicting future events
> like this, I think its better to clarify 'this is what we know works
> exactly'.
> -- 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message