on 2/27/02 1:43 PM, "Otis Gospodnetic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I imagined build.properties.sample as a mostly blank file with a short > description about it's purpose at the top and maybe one commented out > example for people to follow. > So we wouldn't have to keep properties in sync with build.xml. As I said before, it would be a terrible idea to require people to read the build.xml file to figure out what properties they need to override. I liken that to requiring people to read a Makefile or ./configure script. > Ah, you are a committer here, so that -1 definitely has to count (for > some reason I thought you were not a commiter and hence didn't take > that -1 as seriously). Sorry about that. > I'm all for somebody else finishing this business. > Will you do it even if people vote not to use your suggestions? > Dmitry already gave a +1 for no default.properties, which could be a > -1. Dmitry, are you a commiter? I don't see your name on > http://jakarta.apache.org/lucene/docs/whoweare.html If someone gives me a -1, then we are in a stalemate and need to continue to discuss this further. I gave my response to Dmitry's posting, lets wait for his response. p.s. Double negatives are not very clear. Either vote +1 or -1. -jon -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
