Magesh Umasankar wrote:
> You said the answer yourself. When you upgraded from say, Ant 1.2 to Ant
> 1.3,
> you got this warning and you were most pleased. Imagine a user upgrading
> to Ant 1.5 from 1.1. She wouldn't have got a single deprecation warning.
I imagine anyone who jumps from 1.1 to 1.5:
a. Understands the industry and
will know things have changed. Imagine someone who
jumped straight from Windows 1.0 to Windows XP -
not only would they be in shock, but many API's
would be changed or gone. But, anyone making such
a big leap would know it is their own fault for sticking
with an old release for a long time, and then making
a huge leap forward. They wouldn't expect MS to carry
all that excess baggage.
b. Is capable of reading the manual and learning what
has changed, and adapting.
c. <smiley> get what they deserve if they don't grok a & b </smiley>
If we follow this logic to its absurd conclusion, every program
should carry it's excess baggage forward from every release, just
to accommodate the minority.
I feel that the bulk of the Ant users migrate from release
to release in a controlled, orderly manner. By worrying about
the tiny few who install Ant 1.0 and then years later decide
to upgrade to Ant 1.99999, we are doing the majority a disservice.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
