>I have to disagree on this point. Not necessarily in this case but in >general. Adding more options is not better than working out what the >right way to do it is.
A good article, thanks for the link. IMO, It depends on the type of application -- and the type of user. It also depends on how those items are included. I certainly agree that one shouldn't just option everything because someone *might* want it. Rereading my post, I made a hasty generalization. I would limit the context for my comment to framework-type applications where the point of the tool or library is to help me accomplish a certain programming task by making my life easier. Its in those cases that I often find myself wishing the tool's creator had added a few options or provided a facade (and access to the underlying library) instead of forcing me toward what they felt was "the right way" -- thus forcing me to modify the code, seek a workaround, or abandon the tool in order to accomplish my task. I would even limit the context further by saying that adding such options also requires feedback from users asking for a behavior change, or lamenting an arduous workaround. BTW, if it wasn't obvious, I wasn't faulting NAnt on this score. I think NAnt generally strikes a great balance on this topic. Ugh, email is such a difficult medium of expression for nuances :-( Best, Bill ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SlickEdit Inc. Develop an edge. The most comprehensive and flexible code editor you can use. Code faster. C/C++, C#, Java, HTML, XML, many more. FREE 30-Day Trial. www.slickedit.com/sourceforge _______________________________________________ Nant-developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-developers
