Eric van der Vlist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> and hopes he has drawn a picture that looks familiar to the
> inside...
I must admit that I've stayed away from many threads as soon as they
started to get personal, so I may have missed something.
It looks somewhat familiar, but "Accused of imposing his
implementation choices on the design specifications for the Ant 2.0
release" is not exactly what I remember - but then I'm might be too
involved with this to even come close to an objective view.
> Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>
>> all in all I hope your email doesn't mean you are leaving Ant as
>> implied by the article at xmlhack.com.
>
> If I have misread Duncan's words, please feel free to tell so either
> through the "comment" feature we've recently added on xmlhack or by
> mail.
I think only Duncan could tell you, whether you've misread him - I'm
not sure, really.
> We are trying to be as objective and open as possible as value your
> opinion.
I didn't mean to imply anything else.
Thanks
Stefan
