On 29/02/2008, Xavier Hanin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > As reported by IVY-297, Ivy suffers from some name inconsistencies and > strange attribute names. Ivy 2.0 is a good opportunity to fix some of them, > since I think we can afford some more deprecation warnings. > > So I'd like to fix IVY-297 by marking allownomd as deprecated, and providing > a descriptor="required | optional" attribute. >
+1 > To go further, we could rename the attribute skipbuildwithoutivy in > buildlist in skipbuildwithoutdescriptor, or even better change it to > buildwithoutdescriptor="skip | fail | warn | tail | head", which wold make > it both more readable and more powerful. > +1 > Another area where the name 'ivy' is used to talk about module descriptors > in general is patterns. This lead to some strange settings, where you give > an 'ivy' pattern to tell where the poms are. In this case I think we could > support both 'ivy' and 'descriptor' (for resolver patterns for instance), > since the use case for ivy files is still predominant, so I don't think > deprecating the old name would really be better. ??? I don't know. > > So, what do you think about these changes? > > Xavier > > > -- > Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant > http://xhab.blogspot.com/ > http://ant.apache.org/ivy/ > http://www.xoocode.org/ > -- Gilles Scokart --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
