On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, Antoine Levy-Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I understand that there is a consensus to have macrodef use
> @{attribute} notation.
Uhm, yes. If we count your "is fine with me" as +1, we have three +1s
which would be enough for lazy consensus.
> My preference would be to
- deliver ant 1.6
Cheers,
Antoine
-Ursprungliche Nachricht-
Von: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Dezember 2003 16:20
An: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Betreff: Re: Ant 1.6 local and ThreadLocals
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Jose Alberto Fernandez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
We
- deliver a beta3
- introduce local in HEAD
- deliver ant 1.6
Cheers,
Antoine
-Ursprungliche Nachricht-
Von: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Dezember 2003 16:20
An: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Betreff: Re: Ant 1.6 local and ThreadLocals
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Jose
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Jose Alberto Fernandez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > Well now that we are finally getting to an agreement
> > on I think it is time to start a new round
> > of rocous over , (not enough traffic today ;-P )
>
> We don
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Jose Alberto Fernandez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Well now that we are finally getting to an agreement
> on I think it is time to start a new round
> of rocous over , (not enough traffic today ;-P )
We don't seem to be too successful in generating responses these
days. 8-)
Well now that we are finally getting to an agreement
on I think it is time to start a new round
of rocous over , (not enough traffic today ;-P )
I still fill a little unconfortable on using
for defining local-scopes (which was the original usage)
and using to define values that must be differen
