> What must be done to complete the work on SVG (IVY-922/IVY-450 or resp > PR-55/PR-60)? If you fine with merging (eventually adjusting the > contents of SVG), let's do it.
I added a comment on the PR. For short: - license header is missed on two files - improve two JavaDocs - test: does the fresh built Ivy use the SVG graphics? > Changes to alleviate IVY-1315/IVY-1419/IVY-1420/IVY-1437 should be > evaluated by reporters, but nobody responded because the issues are so > old. > I would rather close the issues and a open a new issue if needed. I No. It's just a matter of prioritization by us. > added test cases for every issue highlighting the specific parts of the > problem and I can write up separately on the design problem with > permitting the same attributes on different elements with recursive > inheritance or using the same attribute name with different semantics > depending on the element (perhaps in Confluence? or Github wiki?). Can't understand the problem (haven't that knowledge of Ivy). IVY-1315 "is related to" IVY-1420, which is resolved. Is IVY-1315 also resolved? Then just close that issue. > My opinion on PR-57 is that it addresses another design problem in a > similarly good-enough fashion. We can handle this like Ant and have a > Java > 7 branch (2.5.x) and a Java 8+ branch with further API changes (2.6.x). > The question is, whether that makes 2.5.x more interesting and is worth > the extra work? I wouldn't create an extra branch just for that. I am more a fan of moving to a newer Java version after that release. I recap the PR-57: - multiple changes array->collection - all are fine expect one - one central public interface added one new method -- no changes in semantics, but only in method declaration (array->collection, generics) -- technically one new method and deprecating the old - this means breaking backwards compatibility - proposal is adding a 2nd interface extending the original interface and adding that new method (could be 'inlined' in later Ivy version). I followed the mail thread https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@ant.apache.org/msg46002.html and found another problem - ModuleRules breaks BWC due the same reason (as you pointed it out). Maybe we should not include this PR into an Ivy-2.5.0 release but instead move Ivy-2.6.0 to Java8 and change these parts in a (IMO) right but backwards incompatible way. Jan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
