ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jose Alberto Fernandez <>
Subject Re: cvs commit: jakarta-ant/src/main/org/apache/tools/ant/types
Date Sun, 30 Dec 2001 14:03:34 GMT

I am not a commiter, but I completely agreed with
Peter on this one. 8-o

This is a very substantial change, and as it has been
stressed before anything we add to the API gets set in
stone and we are stuck with it for the whole of ANT1´s
life. Some comments below:

 --- Magesh Umasankar <> wrote: 
> ok, but I understood you OKed some sort of a
> wrapper.  I can back them out,
> of course, if you are giving a -1 to this
> implementation (I understand you
> are
> from what I read, but please confirm).  If you had
> provided these comments
> earlier, it might have helped too.

I think it is dificult to understand completely the
consequences of some of this proposals, just by
reading one e-mail account of it. That is why it is a
good idea to submit this things as proposals, and make
all the changes to tasks there so one can understand
the settle implications of things.

For example, I had a real problem with the
consequences of this change on <property>. The fact
that an input file had to be managed as if it where an
output file just to shortcut the validation, tell me
that we have a problem. I cannot believe this will be
the only place ever were we will have such a

It is a very small issue, which one cannot grasp just
by reading your explanatory message, but it rises a
red flag, at least to me.

> > > The concept of validation here is somewhat
> similar to
> EnumeratedAttribute.
> >
> > Type and validation of type are different concepts
> and shouldn't be merged
> > together. There should be a method that allows
> validation to be extracted
> EnumeratedAttribute, IIRC, performs validation
> also...

This to me is just syntactic validation and would be
equivalent to verifying that the string being passed
corresponds to a valid filename, whether it exists or
not. This is what (I think) File(String) will (or
should) do.

> > Heres one way of "fixing" this - maybe to wait
> till Ant2. 

Please, do not add new APIs which we already believe
are broken or wrong. This is a problem we have had
several times, someone adds some new idea with the
best of intentions, there is little review or
discussion because the person has committing rights,
and then there is no way out of it when problems

The commiters put a very high bar for non committers
to get anything in, lots of discussions and -1s. But I
do not perceive the same level of discussions when
other committers make important changes.

As I said, everyone is working with the best
intensions in mind, but no one can forsee all the
consequences of some changes.

Jose Alberto

Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message