On 8/13/07, Russel Winder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 09:19 +0200, Torsten Curdt wrote: > > > Please - please don't fork. I am sure we will get your patches in. We > > just need someone to push for it.
+1 > I believe Henri is more interested in the 1.x branch, which is why the 2.x > branch has not been progressed, but I am speaking from a position of > fairly deep ignorance. I'm equally interested :) Getting a 1.1 release out made the most sense with the time available - plus Brian was energetic in that direction. When I tried to use CLI2 I didn't like the API a lot, but I was just dabbling and not trying to get the extra features that it supports (I assume). I seem to recall I found it much more verbose than CLI1 which surprised me. Now my energy for CLI is squarely available for CLI2 if there's interest out there. I can see a CLI 1.2 someday if need be, but hopefully it'll just be a few bugfixes and we can have people use the snapshots for that branch. > Clearly 1.1 has many bug fixes over 1.0 and so would be preferred. > However the combination of the change of semantics with hasArgs and > incorrect processing of parameters associated with the new semantics > (cf. CLI-137) means that there appears to be a blocking problem in > processing options such as -D where there can be any number of them on a > command line -- there appears to be no problem with options that do not > have Option.UNLIMITED_VALUES set. Any idea for how 2.0 works with this? Hen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
