On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 7:27 PM, Peter Reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ant attribute names are case insensitive. Yes, but documentation use them in some form, and I wonder how many people change the case from what is documented. BTW, we could make Ivy support for attributes case insensitive too. > > I do not like long attribute names - although I have created > a fair few my self. Same for me :-) Xavier > > Peter > > > > On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 4:59 PM, Xavier Hanin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 9:55 PM, Stephane Bailliez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Xavier Hanin wrote: > > > > Just pinging about this e-mail, I've had no answer so far, I think > I > > > can't > > > > make the choice alone, and we need to deal with that question > before > > > > 2.0final to close IVY-297. So, anyone has an opinion about this: > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 12:31 PM, 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. > > > >> > > > >> 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. > > > >> > > > s/buildwithoutdescriptor/missing-descriptor ? onMissingDescriptor ? > > > > I like onMissingDescriptor. > > > > > > > > > > imnotgenerallyabigfanofwordsgluedtogetherwithoutseparator when it > it's > > > more then 2 words (onchange, on..) > > > > I'm not either, I think at the beginning I thought it was more in the > spirit > > of Ant (where you have some examples like failonerror, > preservelastmodified, > > ... Now we have some inconsistancies, using camel case in some cases, > dash > > separator in others, nothing elsewhere. I don't really like those > > inconsistencies, but I'm not in favour of fixing them all for 2.0(mainly > > for a question of delay). > > > > > > > > > OtherwiseThereIsCamelCaseButThisIsUglyTooForXml > > > > > > >> 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. > > > >> > > > >> So, what do you think about these changes? > > > >> > > > I guess if you want to make it it's probably 2.0 or never... there's > > > already a lot of deprecated right now and it will get more difficult > to > > > push them in later. > > > After all it's a 2.0 > > > > Agreed. > > > > Xavier > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- stephane > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant > > http://xhab.blogspot.com/ > > http://ant.apache.org/ivy/ > > http://www.xoocode.org/ > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant http://xhab.blogspot.com/ http://ant.apache.org/ivy/ http://www.xoocode.org/
