Hi Oleg, > If you are referring to commit r514774 I thought the technical reasons > were fairly clear: (1) we are not shipping contrib code with the > official distribution, so what is the point to reference it in the build > file? It just makes it messier
It hasn't hurt anyone so far, has it? > (2) for the love of Lord what's wrong > with having a local copy of the build script that exactly what you want > the way you want? Yepp, I should have thought about that last year when I set out to rework the build process so that I would not have to maintain a second one locally. Beginner's mistake. Now I can't use the build process as it was, because the default build.xml filename is occupied. If I put anything into the directory tree, it will inevitably end up in svn through an accidental commit. Never mind, I should be able to hack something up within two or three hours. It's just that I wouldn't have spent time on the official build process last year if I had known that I wouldn't be able to use it for my purposes. My main issue with this change was that it feels pretty disrespectful if almost half of your everyday build targets are removed without an advance warning and discussion. (Not that I would have been able to put that in words at the time. Then, it just hurt.) Besides, until you mentioned it before the last release, I was assuming that we did include the full Java directories, including contrib code, in the source distribution. I never cared to check for the presence of individual subdirectories before. > Please lighten up, Roland. There is no evil Russian conspiracy here I'll be pondering that for some time. You'll know that I got over it when I fix the JavaDoc warnings in core. cheers, Roland --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
