On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 15:28, Robert Muir <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 7:21 AM, Earwin Burrfoot <[email protected]> wrote: >> There's no reason, no advantage towards using .xml files for >> configuration, when said configuration can easily be expressed >> programmatically. It just causes problems :) >> > > but the former is java code, so subject to backwards compatibility > policy, right? :)
Could we make a special exception for these /configuration/ .java files? Or can we name them .cava (leaving source code intact)? Or maybe we try linking against common sense with our next release? -- Kirill Zakharenko/Кирилл Захаренко ([email protected]) Phone: +7 (495) 683-567-4 ICQ: 104465785 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
