On Fri, 27 Jul 2001 01:22, Larry V. Streepy, Jr. wrote:
> I will maintain a calm, friendly, debate style tone...
>
> Pete, I am really trying to understand why figuring out all the possible
> ways I might use a feature, then determining if you aren't a fan any of
> the possible uses, is the right way to determine if a feature should be
> in ant.
Engineering 101. Analyze potential uses (or use cases) of feature. If it adds
less value than it costs then don't add it. What do you see as a problem with
this process?
> I'm asking that the committers not try to be the thought police of the
> ant user community. Let us decide how to use the tool. It is that
> after all, a tool. If I hit myself in the head with a hammer, it's my
> fault, not the fault of the hammer manufacturer (current legal evidence
> to the contrary not withstanding :-)
The whole point of committers is to increase the quality and maintain the
vision of a product. ie We are meant to be thought police. If you feel we are
doing something wrong then this is opensource - feel free to start a fork up
on sourceforge and use that copy.
> I apologize if offended anyone with this email.
It takes a lot more to offend than that ... theres been far worse insults and
in many ways "thought police" is a tag given to successful project developers
;)
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 |
*-----------------------------------------------------*
