Of course, it's your right to take on whatever work. It's appreciated and it does mean you have more of a say than I do, since you're putting your money where your mouth is. As a USER though, my objection stems from the many days I've spent fighting forgotten checkins and careless mistakes. Hence, my instinct says that smaller means less chance of screwups, less dependencies is less chance of out of sync issues. I fail to see why that's an unreasonable expectation.
I actually agree with most of your suggestions. Others had intelligent worthwhile things to say about them and I can certainly see the advantage of a uniform coding style and suchlike, even if I personally find it distasteful. it seems a good compromise and makes projects easier on the whole for more developers to grok. The ant thing is symptomatic of your behaviour though. You just ran into a problem where you needed multiple versions of ant, so now everything you touch must support that, just because you had some obscure issue which did.
But as you pointed out on IRC, you're the one willing to do the work, so fuck everyone, you'll just go ahead and do it, end of story. Nevermind that as usual, it's useless work that results in alienating people that didn't need to be alienated.
On Tuesday, December 17, 2002, at 11:49 AM, Patrick Lightbody wrote:
If maintence is your worry, I'll be happy to take care of updating
everything. Since this will be _standard_, all that would need to happen
when ant 1.6 comes out is that we drop a few files in lib/build and commit.
I'll take this task on for each release, which is very rare. The added bonus
of having a totally self-sustained CVS module is very appealing.
-Pat
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hani Suleiman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 8:43 AM
Subject: Re: [Opensymphony-developers] Re: [OS-webwork] OpenSymphony build
process
On Tuesday, December 17, 2002, at 11:31 AM, Patrick Lightbody wrote:If we don't include ant but instead tell people to download ant, I canI disagree. Think of the maintenance hassle. Do you want to check in
promise you that the mavenites will be clamoring for maven builds
instead,
since downloading maven or downloading ant are parallels. Besides,
build.xml
is there, you can use ant just like you always have.
new versions of ant into 10 projects? And the reason maven isn't used
is frankly because it's a foolish tool that is generally used by the
need for coolness factor. While I don't doubt that it's useful for
some, the general impression I get is that it's more of a fun 'look at
all the cruft we get for free' cookiecutter tool.
I don't agree with a comparison of ant and maven. ant is an established
stable tool used by many many projects, it's a standard almost. maven
is....not
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:
With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility
Learn to use your power at OSDN's High Performance Computing Channel
http://hpc.devchannel.org/
_______________________________________________
Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility Learn to use your power at OSDN's High Performance Computing Channel http://hpc.devchannel.org/ _______________________________________________ Opensymphony-developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-developers
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:
With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility Learn to use your power at OSDN's High Performance Computing Channel
http://hpc.devchannel.org/
_______________________________________________
Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
