On Fri, 24 Sep 2004, Ian MacLean wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the change in .85 to make overwrite a read-only property an exception is going to be a huge problem.
we have commented - and then some. Take a look at:
<snip> Doh. Missed that.
the consensus right now is that the param solution is probably the best way to go but it will be more than a quick hack and probably won't make the next release. As I've said previously I'm almost in favour of reverting to the previous behaviour until we have a clean solution in place. Its seeming like the user confusion around this issue is outweighing the benefits of correctly throw the exception when overwriting readonly properties.
btw if you have an alternative solution to offer we'd love to hear it.
+1 on revert.
I'm not too hot on the param solution. Seems like alot of extra work to keep the same functionality that users (think they) have already.
Couldn't you just make properties from -D not read-only and just have a higher precedence than <property> ? I know in Ant -D has higher precedence. if(property set via -D) { don't throw } ?
Just some ideas. I'd rather avoid a new construct/task.
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170 Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM. Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php _______________________________________________ Nant-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-users
