Re: [Result][Vote] Augment feature
Thanks for conducting the vote, Bruce. The task has been added. -Matt On Apr 20, 2010, at 3:46 PM, Bruce Atherton wrote: I lost my email server for a few days, so I can only now close the vote and post the results. I believe that between my returned email feed and the record of posts on MarkMail[1] I have all the results. If you feel your vote was missed, let me know. On question 1, whether to adopt the augment feature code, we had: 7 votes for +1 from Jean Louis, Matt, Bruce, Stefan, Jan, Dominque, Antoine 1 vote for -0.5 from Martijn With more than 3 +1 binding votes and no -1 vetos, the motion passes. On question 2, whether to have a final attribute, the vote was: 1 votes for +1 from Jean Louis 3 votes for +0 from Jan, Dominique, Antoine 3 votes for -0 from Matt, Bruce, Stefan Without the 3 +1 binding votes required, the motion fails. The failure of the second question makes the third moot, but for the sake of history, the result of making the final attribute defualt to false was: 6 votes for +1 from Jean Louis, Matt, Bruce, Jan, Dominique, Antoine 1 vote for +0 from Stefan So the augmentation feature is voted in with +7 positive votes and -0.5 negative ones. The final attribute fails, and the default value of the final attribute is rendered moot. Thanks everyone for voting. [1] http://ant.markmail.org/search/?q=#query:%20list% 3Aorg.apache.ant.dev+page:1+mid:o7hllwxqvkvru4hx+state:results - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
Re: [Result][Vote] Augment feature
Thanks for adding the task Matt, Antoine Matt Benson wrote: Thanks for conducting the vote, Bruce. The task has been added. -Matt On Apr 20, 2010, at 3:46 PM, Bruce Atherton wrote: I lost my email server for a few days, so I can only now close the vote and post the results. I believe that between my returned email feed and the record of posts on MarkMail[1] I have all the results. If you feel your vote was missed, let me know. On question 1, whether to adopt the augment feature code, we had: 7 votes for +1 from Jean Louis, Matt, Bruce, Stefan, Jan, Dominque, Antoine 1 vote for -0.5 from Martijn With more than 3 +1 binding votes and no -1 vetos, the motion passes. On question 2, whether to have a final attribute, the vote was: 1 votes for +1 from Jean Louis 3 votes for +0 from Jan, Dominique, Antoine 3 votes for -0 from Matt, Bruce, Stefan Without the 3 +1 binding votes required, the motion fails. The failure of the second question makes the third moot, but for the sake of history, the result of making the final attribute defualt to false was: 6 votes for +1 from Jean Louis, Matt, Bruce, Jan, Dominique, Antoine 1 vote for +0 from Stefan So the augmentation feature is voted in with +7 positive votes and -0.5 negative ones. The final attribute fails, and the default value of the final attribute is rendered moot. Thanks everyone for voting. [1] http://ant.markmail.org/search/?q=#query:%20list%3Aorg.apache.ant.dev+page:1+mid:o7hllwxqvkvru4hx+state:results - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
[Result][Vote] Augment feature
I lost my email server for a few days, so I can only now close the vote and post the results. I believe that between my returned email feed and the record of posts on MarkMail[1] I have all the results. If you feel your vote was missed, let me know. On question 1, whether to adopt the augment feature code, we had: 7 votes for +1 from Jean Louis, Matt, Bruce, Stefan, Jan, Dominque, Antoine 1 vote for -0.5 from Martijn With more than 3 +1 binding votes and no -1 vetos, the motion passes. On question 2, whether to have a final attribute, the vote was: 1 votes for +1 from Jean Louis 3 votes for +0 from Jan, Dominique, Antoine 3 votes for -0 from Matt, Bruce, Stefan Without the 3 +1 binding votes required, the motion fails. The failure of the second question makes the third moot, but for the sake of history, the result of making the final attribute defualt to false was: 6 votes for +1 from Jean Louis, Matt, Bruce, Jan, Dominique, Antoine 1 vote for +0 from Stefan So the augmentation feature is voted in with +7 positive votes and -0.5 negative ones. The final attribute fails, and the default value of the final attribute is rendered moot. Thanks everyone for voting. [1] http://ant.markmail.org/search/?q=#query:%20list%3Aorg.apache.ant.dev+page:1+mid:o7hllwxqvkvru4hx+state:results - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
Re: [Vote] Augment feature
Martijn, augment can change properties that are coded as attributes, but only interacts with nested elements by adding new children to a given reference. The task as it stands is extremely, extremely simple. Any restrictions we care to impose would complicate it immensely--I would again urge that we consider addressing this universally for all attack vectors by creating a task to armor a reference. In my copious spare time (ha) I may start a sandbox antlib for that purpose. Thanks for not wanting to be a blocker. :) -Matt On 4/18/10, Martijn Kruithof j...@famkruithof.net wrote: Hello I have quite some difficulties with the discrepancy of the name of the task and that what the task is about to do. Therefore, using the current name and functionality I would cast a -0,5 vote, as i do not want to be blocking. I can see the desire for a task that changes predeclared id's. My objection against the current name comes from the fact that the task not only augments (basically adds, increases, stretches, enlarges etc.) things but it is used to change the path at will. On the other hand I think free modification of references seems like a giant pitfall in the following situations: - when used in combination with parrallel - when related tasks in a script expect the same elements present on the path If the augment task was used to do only what its name implies (extend) and not to reduce less problems could be expected. Therefore I would be in favour of an augment feature if it can only be used to augment (and not change at will). On 14-4-2010 0:34, Bruce Atherton wrote: Ok, so this didn't start out as a vote thread, just my suggestion for what questions should appear in the vote. But since it has morphed into that I've changed the subject line to make it easier for people to find. So the questions are: 1. Are you in favor of adding the augment feature to Ant? -0,5 : Non blocking negative look. +1 if augment is only used to augment (increase, extend, combine, add to the existing) 2. Are you in favor of an attribute that allows references to be marked as final, to avoid augmentation? 3. If a final attribute is decided upon, do you think it should default to false? If you have already voted, no need to recast your vote. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
Re: [Vote] Augment feature
Hello I have quite some difficulties with the discrepancy of the name of the task and that what the task is about to do. Therefore, using the current name and functionality I would cast a -0,5 vote, as i do not want to be blocking. I can see the desire for a task that changes predeclared id's. My objection against the current name comes from the fact that the task not only augments (basically adds, increases, stretches, enlarges etc.) things but it is used to change the path at will. On the other hand I think free modification of references seems like a giant pitfall in the following situations: - when used in combination with parrallel - when related tasks in a script expect the same elements present on the path If the augment task was used to do only what its name implies (extend) and not to reduce less problems could be expected. Therefore I would be in favour of an augment feature if it can only be used to augment (and not change at will). On 14-4-2010 0:34, Bruce Atherton wrote: Ok, so this didn't start out as a vote thread, just my suggestion for what questions should appear in the vote. But since it has morphed into that I've changed the subject line to make it easier for people to find. So the questions are: 1. Are you in favor of adding the augment feature to Ant? -0,5 : Non blocking negative look. +1 if augment is only used to augment (increase, extend, combine, add to the existing) 2. Are you in favor of an attribute that allows references to be marked as final, to avoid augmentation? 3. If a final attribute is decided upon, do you think it should default to false? If you have already voted, no need to recast your vote. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
Re: [Vote] Augment feature
1. Are you in favor of adding the augment feature to Ant? +1 2. Are you in favor of an attribute that allows references to be marked as final, to avoid augmentation? +0 3. If a final attribute is decided upon, do you think it should default to false? +1 --DD - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
Re: [Vote] Augment feature
Same here Dominique Devienne wrote: 1. Are you in favor of adding the augment feature to Ant? +1 2. Are you in favor of an attribute that allows references to be marked as final, to avoid augmentation? +0 3. If a final attribute is decided upon, do you think it should default to false? +1 Regards, Antoine - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
[Vote] Augment feature
Ok, so this didn't start out as a vote thread, just my suggestion for what questions should appear in the vote. But since it has morphed into that I've changed the subject line to make it easier for people to find. So the questions are: 1. Are you in favor of adding the augment feature to Ant? 2. Are you in favor of an attribute that allows references to be marked as final, to avoid augmentation? 3. If a final attribute is decided upon, do you think it should default to false? If you have already voted, no need to recast your vote. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
Re: [Vote] Augment feature
On 13/04/2010 3:34 PM, Bruce Atherton wrote: 1. Are you in favor of adding the augment feature to Ant? +1 2. Are you in favor of an attribute that allows references to be marked as final, to avoid augmentation? -0 3. If a final attribute is decided upon, do you think it should default to false? +1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
Re: [Vote] Augment feature
[repeating part of my vote since I didn't vote on the third question last time] On 2010-04-14, Bruce Atherton br...@callenish.com wrote: 1. Are you in favor of adding the augment feature to Ant? +1 2. Are you in favor of an attribute that allows references to be marked as final, to avoid augmentation? -0 3. If a final attribute is decided upon, do you think it should default to false? +0 Stefan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
