On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Peter Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 5 Feb 2002 19:12, Stefan Bodewig wrote: >> >> I don't really understand this, sorry. > > What you dont understand why people or using it or why we should > should support these people?
Why people would want to use one nightly build and adapt to it but not want to adapt to yet another nightly build. > It is trivial to update the projects at Apache and some of the ones > at sourceforge. however it is not so easy to update others that are > not opensource or that we can't contact. Is it unreasonable to expect that people who use nightly builds of Ant instead of released versions follow ant-dev? > what exactly is the problem with these 3 lines? That we are binding our own hands if we extend backwards compatibility to the level of nightly builds. <apply> would still be <transform> as well and <antcall> would be <calltarget>. <zipfileset> has been named <fileset> and <prefixedfileset> and ... It is not the problem of three lines, but a problem of how we want to develop Ant. If every change I make to Ant's code that adds an attribute or nested element or task means I cannot change the name or meaning of this thing while we are in alpha cycles, things will slow down considerably. Stefan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
