At 01:21 16/5/01 -0700, Diane Holt wrote: >simple-to-use tool. And I think that's all people have been asking for -- >to not have things dismissed out-of-hand simply because someone else >doesn't have a need (at this point) to use them, but to look at whether >what's being asked for can be added without over-complicating the tool >itself.
Which is exactly what we are trying to do by separating the build out into multiple phases. People need certain features but that would compromise the experience for other ant developers, we plan to give them the functionality they need - but in a different way (aka templating + autoconf). Remember the rule "don't give em what they want, give them what they need" ;) >Like the saw-blade, I don't know that I'd ever need an if/unless at the >task level (can't think of a situation at the moment where I'd need it), >but I think the criteria for deciding whether to make it available should >be based on whether adding that capability will make Ant more useful to >people who do see a need for it and whether it can be done without >interfering either with the ease-of-use of the tool for those who don't or >with the maintainability of the (source-code for the) tool itself. exactly ! Cheers, Pete *-----------------------------------------------------* | "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, | | and proving that there is no need to do so - almost | | everyone gets busy on the proof." | | - John Kenneth Galbraith | *-----------------------------------------------------*
