On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, Conor MacNeill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I identified what was wrong with Ant1.
I completely agree that there are things in Ant 1.x that are bad and that can only be fixed by changes that break certain parts of the API. I also complete agree with the Ant1 issues you have identified and that they need to be fixed. My key requirements for backwards compatibility are build file level compatibility and "practical" (as you call it) compatibility for task writers. I think this can be done by compatibility layers that both proposals already provide to a certain degree. Taking this point I can live with either proposal as well as the evolutionary approach. I also completely agree with you that a consensus vote on which path to follow is bound to fail and that the only decision can be made by a majority vote. I think that the option to merge the Mutant and Myrmidon code bases doesn't really exist, for technical as well as for non-technical reasons. I do have a very strong bias for one of the two proposals for completely non-technical reasons - and can't have technical reasons as I've not even tried to analyze either proposal yet. This shouldn't affect my vote as - unless some serious technical issues should come up - I'd abstain from the vote and go with the majority anyway. Stefan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
