Russel Winder wrote:
[ . . . ]
One of the reasons that we have our own fork of Gradle currently is that we
needed to be able to programmatically construct the set of projects used in a
build. We would like to to accomplish the same goals with this, but it looks
like you may be planning to use AST transformations or another compile time
technique to implement your scheme. If so, please provide an API oriented
alternative.
[ . . . ]
Having a fork already at this stage in the life of a project is clearly
not a good thing. Hopefully there is a way of reconciling this issue so
that we can return to having a single mainline.
I appreciate this email is not contributing anything technical to the
debate I just wanted to point out the need to avoid a fork that is not a
friendly, and temporary, one.
Our fork is intended to be temporary. We have discussed several of our concerns
with Hans and I think all of our needs will be met in a future release
(hopefully 0.7). We just couldn't get everything addressed in 0.6. The fork is
a way for us to apply our own bug fixes in an timely manner and try out ideas
for new features we need.
--
Steve Appling
Automated Logic Research Team
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
