Stefan Bodewig wrote: > * Provide a clear mission statement for Ant.
+1, although I'm sure some people will argue we already have one. > * Main goals: Simplicity, Understandability, Extensibility +1 > Simple and understandable for the target audience - developers, > build-engineers ... So that breaks into two obvious categories: code interfaces/implementation and task syntax (xml). > * remove magic properties if at all humanly possible +1 > * remove as much dependency on native scripts as possible. +1 > * clean object model (ie Project/Target/Task) +1 > * good event model to integrate well with IDE/GUI/whatever +1 > * use a consistent naming scheme for attributes across all tasks +1 > * keep build file syntax as compatible to Ant1 as possible - > i.e. don't break something just because we can. +1, but lets not take it too far. Especially if we want to implement the previous point properly. > * keep the interface for Tasks as similar to the one of Ant1 as > possible - i.e. don't break something just because we can. +0 > * Ant should be cancelable +1 > * no commit of new features without documentation (ouch 8-) -1. Like other people have mentioned, I'd rather see a task with no docs than no task at all. > * no commit of new features without testcases -0. Nice idea, but it isn't always feasable. Glenn
