Benjamin Bentmann schrieb: > Roger Ye wrote: > >> But is'nt this more an argument for "get used to explicitly state >> encoding" than for >> "a maven wide default is better than a platform wide default"? > > I agree, having users explicitly state the encoding in their POMs is the > best we can have, the same applies to locking down plugin versions by > the way. No guessing, no implicit default values, just full control, > let's call it "heaven" ;-) > > But how to get their? The threat I see with continuing to use the > platform default encoding is that people will be left unaware of the > encoding issue because platform default encoding works just nicely most > of time.
I'm still not convinced that we will get their by trading one problematic default for another. As stated already, one way is creating and improving awareness, e.g. by flagging any problematic access to a file or better stop working (for "new" projects) if encoding is not stated explicitly. Sigh, I'm a bit idealistic, I know.... > >> Or just a warning for not to expect "whole world is just using your >> preferred encoding"? > > Yes, a nice warning is surely due if a) wins. > > > Benjamin > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
