Ceki,
+1
I agree. Too much optionality in a standard means there is nothing standard
about it. I raised some issues about the original layout. These were just
raising what I thought was the common Jakarta approach to some of these
things.
So, lets have a single approach with little optionality. It should be
non-binding with a goal to move current projects to this standard.
I don't think Ant should dictate the structure. I'm confident it will be
able to support anything reasonable.
Bring it on ...
Conor
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ceki G�lc�" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 07, 2001 9:13 PM
Subject: Proposed dirlayout document
Hi everyone,
Having recently looked at http://jakarta.apache.org/site/dirlayout.html, my
impression was that it allowed too many alternatives on a large number of
points rendering the document somewhat confusing (useless?). I am against
making the dirlayout document an exhaustive list of all possible layout
structures. A guideline document should be a bit more assertive.
With your permission I would like to eliminate some of the alternatives.
This is surely going upset some people. I am asking for the permission to
make some potentially controversial changes. Let me repeat that I do not
consider myself as an expert in ANT or to know the optimal directory
structures. As such, you are strongly encouraged to make suggestions.
In order to avoid endless discussion, I am willing to cede my role if
anyone volunteers to take up the responsibility for the document. Best
regards, Ceki
--
Ceki G�lc�
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
