--- Steve Loughran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Neeme Praks wrote: > > Very legitimate concern. > > However, this is a trivial change. > > so are all changes that end up breaking things. > > Ant1.6.4 is really Ant1.6.3a; a late fix for stuff > that wasnt caught in > the beta test. I am really, really, reluctant to > do anything that > could break stuff. If ant1,6.4 ends up broken, we > have to release an > Ant1.6.5 two weeks later, there is more pressure for > last minute > changes, we introduce new bugs, never stabilise, get > a bad reputation > for release management, etc, etc.
In this case, I tend to agree. I can be reckless at times, but considering that 1.6.4 is already an attempt to get the egg off our collective face from a couple of (IMO) showstopping bugs in 1.6.3 perhaps we should leave well enough alone. I agree these changes look innocuous but I worry about the timing. -Matt __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
