On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Smiley, David W. <[email protected]> wrote: > 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. >
I think what i meant is users usually see a required version and think its a >= relationship. So when users try newer versions of junit (and all their tests failed), or things don't work quite right in ant, then they think the whole project is broken. > 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. Yes: the fact we don't test it. > > JUnit and any other library is a non-issue since the build refers to > particular versions. > I don't think its a non-issue, several times on the lists people tried to use newer junit versions with test-framework and didn't understand why things didnt work. -- lucidimagination.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
