Jason, > -----Original Message----- > From: Jason Dillon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Personally I think that all of you who are against this behavior are > crazy. I would be insane too if I had to specify the location of my build > file every time too... so I guess I can understand that a little. >
You are, of course, entitled to your view. My view is that a tool that goes wandering over my directory tree looking for a file to use is not well behaved. Do you have a problem telling your compiler what files to compile? > I am fine with backing out this change, though I think that it would be > better to make it optional and not the default action. Agreed. And that is what Stefan has said too. > There isn't any > reason why a build system can not be easy to use and simple at the same > time. Agreed. > > I have pretty much given up on helping this effort due to the ultra-purist > nature of the developers. I tend to consider myself a purist, > but you guys > take the cake. As I started this thread, I guess you are referring to me as "ultra-purist". I hadn't thought of myself that way :-) Is it just this issue that makes you say this? Are there other instances? > Though I would rather help add useful features to an > open source project, rather than making private modifications, it seems > clear that this group is dedicated to producing a system for > different user > needs. > > Perhaps once there is a simple and powerful way to add features to Ant > (with-out having to maintain a private version) then developers > can be free > to include/exclude the functionality that there environment demands. > Since you have given up on helping, I guess you'll be waiting for someone else to make this happen :-) Perhaps you'll reconsider and continue to make contributions. I hope you won't always expect everyone to agree with you. Cheers Conor
